PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CIAIrt: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood (GL-9470)

(a) The carrier violated the Rules Agreement, effective December 1, 1949, reprinted January, 1958 to include amendment and agreements subsequent to December 1, 1949, particularly Rule 36, when it assessed discipline of dismissal on D. E. Beushausen, Clerk, Argo Yard, I11. on January 22, 1979.

 (b) Claimant Beushausen's record be cleared of the charges brought against him on December 26, 1978. (I.H.B. Docket CLK-180)

 (c) Claim for 8 hours pay at the straight time rate of $59.346 for each and every day until Mr. Beushausea is restored to service with full seniority rights unimpaired. This is a continuous claim to also include all pay increases, cost of living adjustments, holiday pay for any holiday missed, and any vacation time which would have been due and any other benefit due, etc. This is a continuous claim until this claim is brought to a settlement. (I.H.B. Docket CLK-186)

 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant entered service of carrier on July 27, 1977. On
 December 26, 19'78 he received notice to attend an investigation on January 5, 1979 for allegedl and far his failure to perform certain duties on December 23, 1978. On that day Claimant was to be working Position 6, Clerk, at Argo Yard, Illinois; tour of duty 2:30-10:30 P.M. On January 18, 1979 Claimant was notified by Carrier that he had been found guilty as charged and was dismissed fry service as of January 22, 1979.

 Claimant's own admission and testimony from the investigation transcript indicate that Claimant vacated his assignment without permission on the night of December 23, 1978 at 10:00 P.M. and that certain of his duties were not performed on that night; this was because Claimant stated he felt ill and because of other circumstances related to the availability of materials to properly protect his assignment. Whatever the circumstances, however, the Claimant was still liable for completely protecting his assignment and/or of reporting his illness to a superior or to the Chief Dispatcher on the date in question. He did neither.

 Ea view of the record before this Board the only question to be resolved is whether the penalty imposed by Carrier was appropriate. This Board notes that the function of discipline is not only to punish an employe but also to provide corrective and training measures for employes. This position has
 Award Number 24120
 Docket Number CL-24177

 Page 2

 been upheld by this Board on numerous occasions (Third Division No. 19537 inter alia). In this case, an unwarranted half-hour of not protecting one's assignment, and failure to perform certain duties on the date in question which were conceivably related, within the bounds of credibility, to both the grievant s physical health and other work-related circumstances do not merit, is the mind of the Board, discharge although some lesser discipline is is order. It is the view of the Board that the time out of service which Claimant has already suffered is sufficient discipline. The Claimant shall, therefore, be reinstated with all rights unimpaired, but without back pay.

That the parties waived oral hearing;

 That the Carrier and the Employes involved is 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 discipline was excessive.

 A W A R D
Claim sustained is accordance `rJ.th the Opinion.

 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOAM
 By Order of Third Division

 Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 By r--'~..~- CXJ ~~
 Rosemarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

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