Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 26786
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-26343
 88-3-85-3-238
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Eckehard Muessig when award was rendered.

 (Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

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

 (1) The dismissal of Trackman P. J. Marra for allegedly 'Physically Assaulting a Supervisor' was without just and sufficient cause, arbitrary and on the basis of unproven charges.

 (2) The claimant shall be reinstated with seniority and all other rights unimpaired, his record shall be cleared of the charges leveled against him and he shall be compensated for all wage loss suffered."

 FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

 The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

 This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.

The significant events leading to this Claim arose on May 2, 1984. On that date, the Claimant became involved in an altercation with his Supervisor. Subsequent to an i the Carrier that the Claimant provoked and then physically assaulted his Supervisor, resulting in the Supervisor receiving injuries.

 The Organization, relying upon its review of the testimony adduced at the Hearing, contends that the Claimant, in fact, was attacked by his Supervisor. It maintains, and that the Carrier has not met its burden of proof and, therefore, that the Claim should be sustained.

 The Board has carefully reviewed the evidence and has considered the various contentions advanced by the parties. Clearly, there is conflict of testimony. However, even though the evidence is controverted, it is sufficient to justify the conclu that it is not our function to resolve conflicts in testimony and that we will not disturb discipline case findings which are supported by credible, though controverted, evidence.
 Form 1 Award No. 26786
 Page 2 Docket No. MW-26343
 88-3-85-3-238
 It is also well-accepted that men working together may not strike
 each other. When an altercation does occur, the instigator subjects himself
 to possible discharge. For an employee to strike a Supervisor is clearly
 unacceptable behavior.






Attest:
        Nancy J K ver - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of January 1988.