Parties Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees
 to and
 Dispute Norfolk and Western Railway Company

 Statement 1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when Mr. A. J. Kloepper
 of was unjustly dismissed from service on December 21, 1979.
 Claim 2, Claimant Kloepper's record shall be cleared of all charges, that
 he be paid for all time lost at his respective rate and that all other
 rights be restored to him unimpaired.
 Findings The Board, after hearing upon the whole record and all evidence,
 finds that the parties herein are Carrier and Employee within the
 meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, that this Board is
 duly constituted by Agreement dated February 2, 1976, that it has
 jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter, and that the
 parties were given due notice of the hearing held.
 Claimant, a Section Foreman for some twenty-one years, was dismissed
 from service on December 21, 1979, for unauthorized possession and
 use of company property (gasoline) on December 11, 20 and 21, 1979,
 and for falsification of his payroll on December 18, 1979, in that
 he claimed reimbursement for time not actually worked.
 There was sufficient competent, credible and probative evidence adduced
 to support,Carrier's conclusion as to Claimant's culpability. The
 record reflects that Claimant was observed by Carrier's police officers
 when he, assisted by a member of his Section gang, filled three five
 (5) gallon cans with gasoline from a company pump located at Luther
 Yard, St. Louis, Missouri and thereafter placing such cans in Claimant's
        Page 2 personal vehicle, prior to leaving the property at the end of their tour of duty.


        Claimant and his accomplice were again observed placing three gasoline cans under a green tarpulin in the bed of a company truck. Said cans were later filled at the Luther Yard gasoline pump. On the following day Claimant was observed driving such vehicle next to his personal vehicle. Thereafter, he removed one of such cans from the Company truck and poured the contents thereof into his personal vehicle.


        Despite the alleged existence of an arrangement whereby one is permitted to take time off in lieu of overtime pay for the overtime worked such arrangement required advice to be given to his Supervisor. Such advice was clearly lacking in the instant case.


        Consequently, we are impelled to conclude that we find no evidence that Claimant was not given a fair and impartial hearing. That a tape recorder was used to record the investigation was not violative of Rule 20 - Discipline and Grievances - and paragraph (e) thereof in particular. A written transcript, as required, was furnished to the duly authorized representative as he requested.


        The discipline, in light of all of the circumstances involved, was notunreasonable. Therefore, the claim will be denied.


Award Claim denied.

 .t, Christie, Employee Member G. C. Edwards, Carrier Member

                    Arthur T. Van Wart, Chairman and Neutral Member


                    Issued at Salem, New Jersey, November 26, 1980.