(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (The Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad Company



(a) Carrier violated the current Signalmen's Agreement, as amended, particularly Rule 65, when on May 25, 1984 it dismissed Mr. Roller without a fair and impartial hearing and without just and sufficient cause.

 (b) Carrier should now be required to reinstate Mr. Roller to his former position with all right lost time from May 25, 1984 until he is reinstated, and clear his personal record of any reference o file: SG-3-84)"

 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant was employed as a Signalman by Carrier. Claimant
 failed to report for work on his regular Signal Gang assign
 ment, then located at Palisade, Colorado, on April 30 and May 1-3, 1984. On
 May 4, 1984, Claimant was notified to report for an Investigation into the
 charge that he had been absent from duty without authority. After a post
 ponement, the Investigation was conducted on May 21, 1984; Claimant did not
 attend the Investigation. As a result of the Investigation, Claimant was
 dismissed from service on May 25, 1984. The Organization thereafter filed a
 Claim on Claimant's behalf.

 This Board has reviewed the evidence and testimony in this case; and we find that the Claimant was provided with all of his procedural rights, as he was properly notified of the charges against him and afforded a full Hearing in which to present Claimant did not attend the Investigation, when it was heard, he was afforded all of his rights; and his procedural Claims are dismissed.

 With respect to the substantive charges, there is evidence in the record to support the charge that the Claimant failed to report to work on
                      Docket Number SG-26257


April 30, 1984, and May 1, to 3, 1984. Hence, the Carrier had a sufficient basis to impose discipline on the Claimant. Once this Board finds that a Claimant was properly found guilty, we next turn our attention to the type of discipline imposed. This Board will not normally second-guess a Carrier with respect to the imposition of discipline unless the action taken by the Carrier was unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. In this case, there is no evidence in the record of any procedure, and therefore the Claimant is entitled to some warning before receiving the most serious find that it was unreasonable for the Carrier to discharge the Claimant on the basis of the record before us; and we hereby order that the discharge be commuted to a lengthy suspe seniority and all other rights unimpaired but with no backpay.

 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 discipline was excessive.

        A W A R D

        Claim sustained in accordance with the Opinion.

        NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

        By Order of Third Division


                                              ~EIV ED

Attest: GP~

                                                Nancy J. a -Executive Secretary n f. ~12~EJ

4i~ Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 29th day of October 1986.

                                            ~h`~a~c~ Ofiw~.~