r Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 6758
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 6608
 2-SLSF-CM-1 74
 The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Irving R. Shapiro when award was rendered.
 ( System Federation No. 22, Railway Employee'
 Departments, A. F. of Z* C. 1. 0.
 Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)
 ( St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company


















Fore I Award No. 6758
 Page 2 Docket No. 6609
 2-SLSF-CM-'74

 Carrier does clear the air soaeihat when in its Submission it states, "Claimant ... bed been given a leave of absence account sickness August 20, 1970 and subsequently furloughed, ..."

 Although Claimant was fn furlough status, he placed hilaaelf under the care of a doctor described by Carrier as his "personal

 physician" and Petitioner as "Carrier's doctor'. In any event, the'
 medical practitioner imolvedscommencing early in September, 1970,
 Bade application in Claimant's behalf to Carrier's Chief Surgeon for
 a leave of absence and sat forth therein that Claimant was suffering
 Eros pneumonia and arthritis. At the end of that month the Chief
 Surgeon requested a complete medical report which was furnished in
 aid-October, 1970. Subsequent reports on Claimant's physical
 condition were rendered by the local doctor to the Chief Surgeon
 during the winter of 1971. Based aeon these communications the Chief
 Surgeon recommended that Claimant apply for disability annuity on the
 ground that he "has been found to be totally. and permanently disabled
 due to medical disability." This suggestion was not followed by .
 Claimant and in fact he secured employment as a police officer in the
 wall town in which he resided. .

 In !(arch, 1972, Claimant learned that one of the senior Carman at Carrier's Aoory, Mississippi facility was retiring Jane 1, 1972, creating a vacancy which, based upon his standing on the Carmen's Roster 'for that installation, he world be entitled to fill. He advised supervision at Amory of his interest in returning to work upon the position becoming available. Re was told that he could not be restored to work without approval ofCarrier's Chief Surgeon. He submitted himself for a complete-physical examination by the physician who had treated his in 1970 and 1971 sad authorized a report thereof to be forwarded to Carrier's Chief Surgeon. Upon receipt of same, the Chief Surgeon requested further testing and completion-of Carrier's fcme for medical certification of fitness of an eipl0yee to "resume his duties". This was issued on April 25, 1972 setting forth the following "Restrictions, qualifications, ate": "take blood pressure medicine; avoid dusty or polluted areas." ?6e tester Mechanic was authorized to recall Claimant to vokk provided a position was available which was consistent with the restrictions placed by the examining physician. The Neater Mechanic advised that the available work entailed being e:posed to dusty conditions "at certain times of the year" and that a "carts in amount of polluted air" developed from welding or torch cutting ope:ations in the area where claimant would be working sad therefore he its unable to state that a position within the specified . restricted, limits was available.

 On July 19, 1972 an appeal from a denial of class by local chairaan was filed in Claimant's behalf by his Organisation in which was set forth a charge of violation of the recall provisions of the Controlling Agreement,, a demand for back pay for Claisiant"frog the tine the job was available in Amory, Mississippi, which he had seniority, on ... until such tine as he is restored to service." Attached
 Fore; 1 Award No. 6758
 Page 3 _ . _ : Docket No. 6608
 . - 2-SLSF-CM-174

 thereto was a medical report from another physician dated June 30,.
 1972, outlining his findings after a. review of Claimant's history and
 a physical examination.. It stated in part.that no "abnormalities"
 were found and that Claimant "is able to carry on any kind of work."
 Also attached was a chest X-ray report dated July 2, 1972 indicating
 a finding of "normal" with reference to Claimant, and a Carrier physical
 certification fnoa in which Claimant's physician stated he was able
 to rescue his duties with safety, *tee as of June 30,. 1972: On Jelly
 27, Carrier's Chief Surgeon sent to the General Chairman another
 certification fore for completion by Claimant's doctovand rotor to
 his. ?his was done by transmission through the General .Chairman on
 August 219 1972. ?he Chief Surgeon then recommended that Clairol be
 examined by one of three local physicians in behalf of Carrier is a
 notice to the Mauler Mechanic dated August 28,.1972. Claimant
 submitted for a complete physical an September 8, 1972, by the same
 physician who had treated him in 1970 and 1971 aand 'had rendered the
 report upon which the Chief Surgeon relied when he set the restrictions
 on Jane I, 1972. As a result of this report, the Chief Surgeon,
 on September 12; 1972 authorized restoring Claimant to work as a car
 inspector without restrictions sad claimant t recommenced service with
 Carrier on September 18, 1972:


It is wall established, and our Awards have consistratly sustained the right of Carrier to be assured that its employes, returning from sick leave of absence or furlough, ors physically able to pefform their-fob duties without endangering themselves or others. (Awards 3108, 41e3, 4244, 4510: 5652, 58.56,5943, 6198, 6233, 6278, 6305,
6310, 6312, 6331s. 63b3 and 6561.

 In the:ioetant case. Carrier had~in its recordscencerning_CLaimsnt,

 a series of reports that he had bees suffering from a number of nilients. during the, two years prior to the lice a vacancy arose, which according 'to his senioritjr status,-Fee waif entitled to fill. It cannot be held, therefore, that Carrier acted improperly when it required a certificate of physical fitness before approving restoration of this Claimant to service. ?he Chief Surgeon, on June I, 1972, relying on the certificate issued by the physician who examined Claimants authorised recall of Claimant provided his duties would not be under conditions contrary to the restrictions recommended in said medical certificate. Until supervision vas is receipt of this deter'ination, it could not be expected to consider complying with Rule 27(d) of the Controlling
 Agreement, ?he Master Mechanic, in reply to the initial claim,
 stated that the available position entailed factors which could not be.worked by an employe who was limited by physical restrictions frog performing the duties called for by the job. Nothing in this record controverts the position of this Supervisor that dusty conditions sad polluted air tended to exist in the are: where Claimant would be required to work; the conditions declared detrimental to Claimant by the certifying physician.
 Form 1 Award No. 6758
 Page 4 bucket No. 6608
 ' 2-SLSF-CH-1 74

 However, on or about duly 21, 1972, Carrier's Chief Surgeon was in receipt of a certificate from a qualified medical practitioner giving claimant what appears to be a "clean bill of health". Instead of promptly ordering a .reexamination by a Carrier designated physician, the Chief Surgeon, approximately one week later called for Claimant's doctor to provide the information on Carrier's special force. Upon receipt thereof, the Chief Surgeon then ordered the further physical reexamination which he obviously intended to require on or before July 27, 1972. '

 In Awards of this and other Divisions of this National Railroad Adjustment Board, it has been stressed that undue and unwarranted delay in ascertaining a returning worker's physical fitness- to perform the duties of his fob cannot be countenanced. The deprivation of an employee of his livelihood and benefits for a period of ties without justification imposes a hardship which he should not be required to bear. (Awards 5278, 6505, 6310, 6312, 6331, 6363, 6551).
It is evident that a clarification of this Claimant's condition could have been secured on or before August 1, 1972; had the Chief . Surgeon acted with reasonable and not necessarily endue haste; and claimant could have been restored to service on or before that date. Me is entitled to made whole for the lost earnings suffered between

 August 1, 1972 and September 18, 1972, less any amounts earned,
 by Claimant in other employment during said period. The determination
 of the amount Claimant would have earned in Carrier's employ shall be
 that earned or would have been earned by the employs who occupied his
 place on the Carrier's Amory, Mississippi Carmen Roster daring that
 period if he had worked all assignments he was scheduled for during
 that tine.

 This Board has dealt at length in numerous Awards with the demand for interest in conjunction with wage losses sustained by employee due to noncompliance by Carriers with Rules and Standards. Ho useful purpose would be served in restating the concepts which are the basin for denial of this requested relief, and we are adhering to those principles in denying same herein.




Form 1 - Award No. 6758
 Page 5 _ ' Docket No. 6608
 2-SLSF-CH-1 74
 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
 By Order of Second Division

 Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 Bv
 Y-

Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of July, 1974.
 ,,,/

 \\