(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Providence and Worchester Railroad Company

On behalf of J. J. Jette for all lost time and benefits when, on May 14, 1985, he was dismissed from Carrier service account of alleged careless behavior while worki
OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant was first employed by the Carrier in September
 1977 as a Track Technician. On May 8, 1984, Claimant was working in a group assigned to gather tools from along the right-of-way. As Claimant tossed a load of tools onto the bed of the truck, one of the tools bounced off the others and broke the cap and the window of the truck. By letter dated May 14, 1984, Claimant was dismissed from service. The Organization thereafter filed a dismissal.

 This Board has reviewed the evidence in the record, and it finds that there is sufficient evidence to support the finding that the Claimant was guilty of carelessness and other safety violations on May 8, 1984, when he was loading tools into the bed of the hi-rail pickup truck being used by his gang. The record is clear that the Claimant was aware of the great importance that the Carrier places on proper and safe conduct, and his actions clearly violated several General Safe
Once this Board has determined that there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the finding of guilty, we next turn our attention to the type of discipline imposed. This Board will normally not set aside the Carrier's imposition of disci Moreover, the Claimant had received three written warnings.
                    Docket Number SG-26277


Although the Organization argues that the Claimant is a longtime employee, the record is clear t years and that his total time of active service was the equivalent of two and three-quarter years.

 Consequently, the Claimant does not have a work history either in terms of length of service or in terms of good behavior to justify setting aside the discipline imposed by the Carrier. The action of the Carrier was not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious, and the Claim must be denied.

 FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the parties
 to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and upon the whole
 record and all the evidence, finds and holds:

 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 ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                              By Order of Third Division


Attest
        Nancy J r - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 19th day of September 1986.