(i) Carrier violated the provisions of Rule 24 when, on September 19, 1994, it held Claimant from service pending a disciplinary investigation.

violation of Rule 24 of the Agreement, when by notice of October

12, 1994, it assessed discipline of "Termination from Service"

against Claimant, pursuant to an investigation held on September

28, 1995.

(3) Carrier shall now reinstate Claimant to service with seniority rights unimpaired and compensate Claimant an amount equal to what he would have earned, including but not limited to daily wages, holiday pay and overtime, had he not been held from service and had discipline not been assessed.

(4) Carrier shall now expunge the charges and discipline from Claimant's record.

(5) Carrier shall now reimburse Claimant for any amounts paid by him for medical, surgical or dental expense to the extent that such payments would be payable by the current insurance provided by Carrier.

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

Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.

After Investigation, Claimant, a Baggage Person, was dismissed by letter of October 12,1994 for accepting payment from a customer and not remitting or reporting the same to the Carrier.

The record shows that on August 22, 1994, while working at Emeryville, California, Claimant accepted a 27 piece shipment from a customer to be shipped to Ann Arbor, Michigan, and collected approximately $221.00. The customer testified that Claimant handled the shipment and that he gave payment to Claimant. According to the customer, Claimant was paid in cash. The testimony of the Lead Baggage Person D. Williams shows that he assisted Claimant with the transaction with the customer and that Claimant took care of the customer's paperwork and movies. The testimony of the Customer Service Supervisor M. Jaeger establishes that the movies were not remitted to the Carrier.

Substantial evidence supports the Carrier's position that Claimant engaged in conduct worthy of discipline. Under the circumstances, dismissal was not arbitrary.