Having carefully reviewed all the evidence in this record, and having considered each argument raised by the parties, it is my conclusion that the Grievant violated the terms of the LCA and that the USPS therefore had just cause to suspend him for 30 days. Accordingly, the grievance must be denied.  In part:  Finally, it is entirely irrelevant the the supervisor and other reviewing officials may have been aware of Grievant's extensive disciplinary history before suspending him.  Indeed, it is often held that management should conduct a thorough review of the employee's personnel record prior to imposing discipline.  In any case, there is no evidence that the 30 day suspension at issue here was based in any was on prior discipline meted out to Grievant. The Notice of suspendion makes no reference to anything other than the LCA and the four specific allegations discussed above. The disciplinary penalty was clearly specified in the LCA and was not the result of progressive discipline in the usual sense. Under these circumstances, I cannot agree that management imporperly relied on Grievant's disciplinary record when investigating the alleged misconduct or when imposing discipline for his violation of the LCA.

    For the above reasons, and based on the record as a whole, I find that the USPS had just cause to suspend Grievant for 30 days in accordance with the LCA dated March 26, 2001.  Moreover, I find that where were no mitigating circumstances or procedural errors that would justify reducing or overturning that discipline.