THIRD DIVISION Docket Number MW-24491


                    Edward M. Hogan, Referee


                (Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Dmployes

PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
                (Union Pacific Railroad Company


STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The Agreement was violated when the Carrier terminated its employment of Carpenter D. B. Green on November 7, 1980 (System File 6-23-11-14-55).
(2) The claimant shall be reinstated with seniority and all other rights unimpaired and he shall be compensated for all wage loss suffered.
OPINION OF BOARD: On November 7, 1980, the Carrier advised the Claimant by
 certified mail that because he had voluntarily absented himself
 from his assignment during the week of October 27, 1980 through November 7, 1980,
 without authority and without notification to the Carrier., the Carrier was
 considering this absence as a voluntary forfeit of his seniority rights and
 employment relationship with the Carrier pursuant to Rule 48(k) of the agreement,
 which is cited below:
        'Employees absenting themselves from their assignments far five (5) consecutive working days without proper authority shall be considered as voluntarily forfeiting their seniority rights and employment relationship, unless justifiable reason is shown as to why proper authority was not obtained.


The organization contends that the action of the Carrier was improper and that a formal investigation should have been conducted. The Carrier argues that the claim is procedurally deficient, and should not be before this Board; the Carrier further argues that its application of Rule 48 (k) of the agreement was proper.
Usually this Board could discuss and consider both the procedural and substantive aspect of matters before it. However, in this claim, we elect to not comment on the procedural arguments of the Carrier and rule on the merits of the claim for we find that the application of Rule 48(k) of the controlling agreement was correct, and that this claim has no merit. We cannot give credence to the Claimant's post-occurrance application to request that vacation time be applied to the times he was absent without authority or permission. We agree with the position of the Carrier that Claimant cas solely responsible for his plight, and a contention that the Carrier was somehow responsible for Claimant's absence is an argument which cannot prevail.
        FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board upon the whole record and all the evidence finds and holds:


        That the parties waived oral hearing;

            Award Number 24671 Page 2

                      Docket Number MW-24491


That the Carrier and 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
        That the agreement was not violated.


                          A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD Aa7USTMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


Attets:
        Nancy J De -Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 24th day of February, 1984
C~

 v 1 '