(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Hay Employee PARTIES 10 DISPUTE:



STATO'NT CF Q.AD4: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

(1) The dismissal of Trackman Martin R. Haack for alleged insubordination and eruct unbecoming an employe was without just and sufficient cause and wholly disproportionate to such charges (System File C-D-875/MG2686).

(2 Trackman Martin R. Haack shall be allwed the remedy prescribed in Rule 24(e;."

OPI910S OF BOARD: The claimant herein vas employed by the Carrier as a
trackman, and had about two years of service at the time of the occurrence giving rise to the dispute herein. On November 14, 1979, he vu notified:







the hearing vas conducted as scheduled, and a copy of the transcript has been made a part of the record. Claimant vas present throughout the investigation and vas repres stated that he protested the hearing because of lack of a precise charge. It is noted that Rule 24(b) of the applicable Agreement does not contain the word "precise." However, the Board concludes that the charge quoted above vas sufficiently precise to ena defense. It notified claimant of the action complained of, the time, date, and place. The charge met the requirement of the rule and the investigation vas conducted in a fair and impartial manner.



There is substantial evidence in the investigation that claimant refused to stop blowing the horn of the bus, that he was driving to take the men to the work site, when instructed to do so by the Supervisor of Work Equipment. The horn stopped blaring when a mechanic disconnected the horn wire.

There is also substantial evidence that claimant used foul and abusive language to the supervisor.

The Board finds substantial evidence in the investigation to support claimant's dismissal from the service. The Carrier's action was not arbitrary, capricious or in bad faith.

        FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Boexd, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:


        That the parties waived oral hearing;


That the Carrier and the Foployes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;

That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

        That the Agreement was not violated.


                        A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSS031T BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:
      Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 26th day of February 19a2.