PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

1. The dismissal of Material Engineer R. T. Rollo for alleged 'violation of Conrail Order AD 0.0 basis of unproven charges and excessive (System Docket CR-858-D).

2. The claimant's record shall be cleared of the charges leveled against him, he shall be reinstated with seniority and all other rights unimpaired and he shall be c
OPINION OF BOARD: At the time of the incident at issue, Claimant was employed
as a Material Engineer by the Carrier in its Allegheny "B"
Division. Claimant was notified to attend a formal Investigation in connec
tion with the following charges:
























                      Docket Number MW-26499


          The foregoing offenses represent inappropriate conduct on your part in violation of Conrail Order AD 0.01, specifically paragraphs 4.0, 4.1, 4.1.1, 4.1.2 and 5.4.1, President Reed's letter of September 16, 1981.


          The Hearing was held as scheduled on April 5, 1984. As a result of the Investigation, Claimant was dismissed from Carrier's service. The Organization thereafter filed a Claim on Claimant's behalf challenging his dismissal."


This Board has reviewed the evidence and testimony in this case, and we find that there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the finding that the Claimant acted improperly and in violation of Carrier orders. However, the record also esta by his Superiors; and there is no evidence that Claimant was dishonest or acted with wrongful intent. The billing procedures at issue were already in use when the Claimant was promoted to Material Engineer; and although the Claimant violated the order and subjected himself to discipline, he was merely following the procedures that he had been told to follow by his Superiors, and he acted with no wrongful intent.

Consequently, this Board finds that the Claim must be sustained in part; and the Claimant must be returned to service, although without back pay. It was unreasonable for the Carrier to impose a dismissal on the Claimant for the offense since he had no bad motives and was merely following orders from his Superiors.

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.

                      Award Number 26501 Page 3

                      Docket Number MW-26499

                      A W A R D


        Claim sustained in accordance with the Opinion.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


Attest:

      Nancy J. De'4er - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 9th day of September 1987.