PARTIES TO DISPUTE: '
Norfolk and Western Railway Company STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

 1. Carrier violated the effective agreement dated February 1, 1951, on January 7, 1977, when it dismissed Claimant A. P. Hull from service.

 2. The dismissal of the claimant was excessive, capricious, unwarranted and unjustified. The claimant should now be restored to service with seniority unimpaired and payment allowed for the assigned working hours actually lost, less any earnings in the service of the company.

The carrier and employee involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended. This Board bad jurisdiction over the dispute: involved herein. OPINION:
 The Carrier terminated the Claimant over his refusal to carry out an order to load a water cooler on the personnel bus. According to the record, his refusal to do so was apparently not accompanied by belligerence an his part, merely a refusal couched in a question as to why some other employee could not do so. This Board hews to the principle that discipline should be corrective and might well have considered an
                                          Page 2


explanation by the Claimant as to why he was not in error, or some indication of contrition on the part of the Claimant as a basis for reinstatement; however, we find no such option available given the Claimant's own disinclination to appear in his own behalf, although he was apparently properly notified to do so. We find, as commendable, the Organization's earnest efforts to gain for the Claimant that which he apparently was disinterested in doing for himself; however, we conclude that lack of the Claimant's own resolve in this regard is sufficient basis in supporting the Carrier's decision to remove. AWARD:

      Claim is denied.


                  Ja F. Scearce

                  Ne t al Member


G. C. Edwards Fred Wurpel, Jr.
 Carrier Member Organization Member
 Dated this day of I · ~f D~ at

              .. . ,, p -I 7~ IF37