Edward L. Suntrup, Referee


PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT CF CIAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The dismissal of Trackman K. A. Covent for being absent from work 'on January 2, 1980, without proper permission and/or authority' was excessive and wholly disproportionate to the o with which charged (Carrier's File S 310-334).
(2) Trackman K. A. Covent 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, Mr. K. A. Covent, entered service of the Carrier as
a trackman on July 7, 1976. On January 10, 1980 he received
notice to report for formal investigation on January 17, 1980 to:

The hearing date was subsequently postponed and rescheduled for February 5, 1980. Claimant did not attend this hearing. On the same date a second hearing was held to attempt to determine why Claimant also did not attend the hearing originally scheduled for January 17, 1980 which was the reason why t hearing was rescheduled for February 5, 1980.

By letter dated February 6, 1980 Claimant vas notified by the Carrier that he was dismissed from service.

A review of the transcripts of both hearings indicate that sufficient substantial evidence is present to warrant the discipline imposed by the Carrier. There is unrefuted testimony that Claimant return to work at 6:30 P.M. on January 2, 1980 as he was instructed to do, nor did he make any attem notify the Carrier that he could not cover his assignment on that day. This Board has gone on.record numerous times to the effect that absence without authority can merit discharge from service (See Th Division 10974, 16860, 2100+ inter alia). There is also irrefuted testimony to the effect tha simply disregarded the notice for the investigative hearing which was to be held on January 17, 1980 Law Board No. 2010 (Award 15) establishes precedent, which this Board cites with favor, that employe are not to be granted the right to boycott investigations with impunity.


FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and


That the Carrier and the Employes 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

A W A R D



                            BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division

Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
        National Railroad Adjustment Board


BY
        Rosemarie Branch - Administrative Assistant


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

                                        RECEIVE


                                                  1

JUNE 2 81983


`~so office- -°`s