PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The fifteen (15) days of suspension imposed upon Foreman J. J. Russo for alleged violation of Rule "A" and "K" on October 21, 1981 was arbitrary, capricious, on the basis of unproven charges and in violation of the Agreement. (System Docket 280D).
(2) The claimant's record shall be cleared of the charges leveled against him and he shall be compensated for all wage loss suffered.
OPINION OF BOARD: By notice dated October 21, 1981, the Claimant J. J. Russo was
 notified to attend a trial on October 30, 1981 to determine
 his responsibility, if any, with respect to alleged violation of Carrier's General
 Rules of Conduct A and K. Claimant was specifically charged with dereliction of duty
 while assigned as a Gang Foreman on October 2,1, 1981. On that date at approximately
 4:20 AM members of the gang under his immediate supervision were found sleeping
 in the Third Rail E. T. Locker Room, Penn Station, New York. After the trial was
 held the Claimant received notice dated November 3, 1981 stating that he was being
 assessed a fifteen (15) day suspension from service.
A review of the record shows testimony by two Carrier witnesses to the effect that employees under the supervision of the Claimant were sleeping at approximately 4:20 AM on the date and at the locale in question. This evidence is uncontested. The record further establishes that the Claimant was the Third Rail Electrician Gang Foreman on the date in question, hours 11:59 PM to 7:59 AM. The Board must conclude, therefore, that there is sufficient substantial evidence herein to warrant conclusion that the Claimant is guilty as charged. Substantial evidence has been defined as such "relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion" (Consol. Ed. Co. vs Labor Board 305 U. S. 197, 229). With respect to the quantum of discipline assessed the Board can find no grounds in the record before it to permit it to conclude that the actions of the Carrier were unreasonable or arbitrary.




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;
                    Docket Number MW-25166 Page 2


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:
        Nanc~r - Executive Secretary

        G'


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 18th day of July 1984.