Upon the whole record and all the evidence, the Board finds that the parties herein are carrier and employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, Further, the Board is duly constituted by Agreement, has jurisdiction of the Parties and of the subject matter, and the Parties to this dispute were given due notice of the hearing thereon.

Routinely, this Board has held that the charged employee, in almost all cases, is not

required to attend the Investigation. It is an option he has, but if he does not attend it Is at his peril as no one Is there to rebut the evidence furnished by the Carrier.

In this instance, Claimant-was working at Gillette, Wyoming, about a nine to ten hour drive from Pueblo, Colorado, where the Investigation was held, and it would seem unreasonable to hold the Investigation so far from the work site, yet there Is no evidence that a postponement was requested by the Claimant, In fact, the transcript reads as though his representative expected Claimant to be present.

Under these circumstances, the Board finds nothing improper in holding the Investigation In Claimant's absence.

Regarding the merits, the main Carrier witness did not witness the Incident. He only "surmised" what occurred based upon his years of experience, The operator of the machine that was bumped did not know what actually happened other than he heard the horn and jumped away from the tie plugger,

Even if the Claimant is not in attendance to rebut Carrier's evidence, the testimony has to be credible, The Carrier still has to furnish substantial evidence of Claimant's culpability for the charges assessed.

When the Carrier's main witness testimony Is based upon surmisal and nothing else, the evidence presented does not meet the substantial evidence criteria so necessary to sustain the charges.

AWARD