NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION

 Herbert Fishgold, Referee

 Award Number 2505?
 Docket Number CL-24209

 (Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks, ( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes

 (Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway Company

1. Carrier violated the effective Clerks' Agreement when, on June 17, it called Clerk A. J. Berta to attend two (2) investigations on one of his

 assigned rest days and refused to compensate him accordingly;

 2. Carrier shall now compensate Mr. Berta for eight (8) hours' pay at the time and one-half rate of Position JT-576 for June 17, 1980.

 OPINION OF BOARD: By letter dated June 11, 1980, Claimant was charged with two
 separate offenses anal ratified that a formal investigation
 would be held on June 17, 1980 to develop all facts and determine his responsibility,
 if any, relative to the charges contained therein. There being no request for a
 postponement, the investigations were held on June 17, 1980 as scheduled with both
 Claimant and his representative in attendance.

 From the facts developed at the June 17 investigations, it was determined that Claimant was responsible as charged. Consequently by letters dated June 20, 1980, he was assessed a three-day and a ten-day suspension respectively. These suspensions are rat directly pertinent to the instant claim.

 Petitioner alleges that Carrier violated the Agreement Rules, in particular Rules 29 and 43, when it required Claimant to attend the investigations on one of his rest days on his current position of JT 576, and, therefore, Claimant is entitled to be compensated at one day's pay. Rules 29 and 43 read as follows:

 "RULE 29
 INVESTIGATION AND HEARING - WHEN HELD

 Investigations and hearings shall be held when possible at home terminal of the employer involved and at such time as not to cause the employer to lore rest or time. Employes shall have reasonable opportunity to secure the presence of representatives and/or necessary witnesses."

 NOTIFIED OR t3ALI,ED

 Except as provided in Rule 44, employer notified or called to perform work not continuous with, before, or after the regular work period shalltby"allowed a minimum of three (3) hours for two (2) hours work or ,leas'0" and "if held on duty in excess of two (2) hours, time and one-half sttatr be allowed on the minute basis.


        An employee notified or called to perform work. on any of his regularly assigned days of rest, or on any holiday specified in Rule 48 will be allowed a minimum of eight (8) hours pay at the time and one-half rate."


The primary issue involved in this dispute is whether an employe who attends a discipline investigation in which he is the charged party, and is subsequently found guilty of the charge, is contractually entitled to be paid for days) of attendance at the hearing.

 In the absence of a specific provision in an agreement that a charged party shall be paid for attendance at a discipline investigation hearing it is the practice in the railroad industry, as recognized by this Board, that the employe is not contractually entitled to pay for time in attendance at the hearing. See, e.g., Awards 21320 and 22844.

 The record before the Board contains no evidence of probative value that on this property payment to a charged party, who is found guilty of the charge, has been historically and customarily paid as requested in this case. Neither Rules 29 nor 43 supports payment for attendance at an investigation. Such attendance is not considered the performance of work.

 .As the Organization has not in this case presented a sufficient body of evidence to sustain its position, we therefore must deny this claim. Notwithstanding denial of the instant case, we do by way of dicta suggest that the Carrier when scheduling investigations arrange them so that they will not cause the charged employe to lose time or rest.

        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;


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

        That the Agreement was not violated.


                    A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD AD T BOAR149P

                            By Order of Third 4D Eton


                                          ~~`tCe. gM


ATTEST:- ~i~!~
 Nancy J. r Executive Secretary

        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 4th day of October, 19$4.