PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

 (1) The dismissal of Trackman S. E. Johnson for being absent from duty without permission on January 24, 1980 was excessive and wholly disproportionate to the offense with which charged (Carrier's File S 310-336).

 (2) Trackman S. E. Johnson shall be reinstated with seniority, vacation and all other rights unimpaired and he shall be compensated for all wage loss suffered including holiday pay."

 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant entered service on September 17, 1974. On February
 5, 1980 Claimant was notified to report for formal investigation to ascertain his responsibility, if any, with respect to his being absent from his duties as trackman on Gang 5495 at Troup, Texas on January 24, 1980 without proper permission and/or authority. On February 6, 1980 Claimant was notified that he had been found guilty as charged and that he was dismissed from service.

 The accepted norm in discipline cases is the Railroad Industry is that the rule of substantial evidence be applied. Substantial evidence has been defined as "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion" (Consol. Ed. vs. Labor Bd. 305 U.W. 197, 225). A review of the record in this case before the Board indicates that the requirements of this rule have been met.

 The only issue, therefore, before this Board is the instant case is the determination of whether the discipline assessed was reasonable. This Board has held the position, in its acceptance of the principle of progressive discipline, that service record can play a role in establishing an equitable relationship between infraction and discipline (Second Division 2066 and 9281 inter alia). The poor prior service record of Claimant was alluded to in therinvestigative hearing by Roadmaster Wright and this record was explicitly referred to during the appeals on the property by Carrier Director of Labor Relations, thus forming part of the permanent record related to this case prior to ex pane submissions. In view of this, and the preponderance of substantial evidence on record to substantiate Claimant's guilt as this relates to the January 24, 1980 infraction, the Board will not disturb Carrier's determination in this case.



                        Docket Number hb1-24166


That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved Joe 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 ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

        Rosemarie Breach - Administrative Assistant


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 14th day of January 1983·

 i

    _.._~ ~ ..~