Form l NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 6985
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
6891
2-L&r-MA-'
76
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Walter C. Wallace when award was rendered.
( International Association of Machinists
( and Aerospace Workers
Parties to Dispute:
( Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes-._ _
(a) That Machinist Apprentice Barry Brooks was unjustly dealt with
under the controlling agreement and thereby damaged when he was
deprived of his employment on March
13, 1974,
as a result of being
removed from the service of the Carrier on the charge of "Excessive
absenteeism and being absent from his regular assignment on
February
13, 1974
without permission."
(b) That accordingly Machinist Apprentice Barry Brooks be compensated
for all time lost and, further, that .he be made whole for any and
all benefit losses suffered as a result of Carrier's action
against him.
Findings:
The Second Division of Ve Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and
all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employe
o
employes involved in this
dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the
Railway Labor Act as approved June 21,
1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
The Claimant is charged with excessive absenteeism and being absent
from his regular assignment on February
13, 1974
without permission. His
employment dates back to
1967
and this is not the first time his absenteeism
has been the subject of disciplinary action. In
1973
he was subject to an
investigation on charges of excessive absenteeism and as a consequence he
was returned to his job with the admonition that his attendance should
improve. The record indicates Claimant's absences were reduced for several
months in the middle and latter part of
1973.
In December,
1973
three
single men moved into a neighboring house and his problems began. Coincident
with their arrival there were breaking and entry occurrences at other
neighboring homes; Claimant's wife.,observed these individuals peeping in their
Form
1
Award No. 6986
Page 2 Docket No. 6891
2-I&N-MA-'76
windows and doors; Claimant's wife was terrorized. Claimant was working
the night shift and his wife feared being alone. As a consequence Claimant
felt obligated to lay off and protect his wife. With respect to the
February 13, 1974 absence, Claimant maintains he called twice but could
not make a connection with the operator.
The evidence produced at the investigation demonstrated Claimant's
guilt, however, we find certain mitigating circumstances that make the
discipline of dismissal excessive in this case. The Second Division Award
6960, Referee David P. Twomey, similarly involved charges of excessive
absenteeism. In that Award the Board made a statement in its Findings which
is applicable here and is adopted herein:
"It is the opinion of this Board that the discipline imposed
by Carrier has served its purpose: we therefore order the
Claimant returned to service without back pay, but with all
other rights unimpaired. We order that the disciplinary
action be made part of Claimant's record. The Claimant
should understand without any equivocation that it is
absolutely mandatory and necessary that he maintain a
reasonable attendance record and that he be a dependable
employee of the Carrier. It goes without saying that the
Claimant is now being given a final opportunity to correct
his improper conduct. We expect him to fully live up to
his obligation to his job."
A W A R D
Claim sustained to the extent indicated in Findings.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
By
o~emarie Brasch - Administrative. Assistant
Dated a~ Chicago; Illinois, this 13th day of January, 11976.
' n