Foam 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award. No. 7+32
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 711+x+
2-SOU-EW-' '!'3



( System Federation No. 21, Railway Employes'
( Department, A. F. of L. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Electrical Workers)
(
( Southern Railway Company

Dispute: Claim of Employes:










Findings:

The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

The carrier ox carriers and the employe ox employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 193+.

This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.



On January 29, 1975 Claimant, a telephone maintainer, and another telephone maintainer were working on their maintenance territory near Rome, Georgia. They were instructed by their supervisor to report the following day with additional clothing prepared to work the next couple of days in the axes near Chattanooga where intermittent trouble was occurring. Both were instructed by the supervisor to remain overnight at a motel in the Chattanooga area in order to complete inspections before the weekend. Claimant did not stay in the Chattanooga area the following evening (January 30, 1975) as instructed. Instead he returned to Rome, Georgia, ostensibly fox the purpose of getting his clothes. An emergency situation arose that same evening and Claimant could not be reached even though several calls were made at the motel in Rome where Claimant resided. The following moaning (January 31)
Form 1 Page 2

Award No. 7+32

Docket No. 7144

2-SOU-EW-'78


Claimant called his supervisor and told the supervisor that he had spent the previous night with a friend. When Claimant was asked why he failed to follow instructions and stay in the Chattanooga area, he replied that what he did after 5:00 P.m. was none of Carrier's business.

Claimant was dismissed from Carrier's service. After investigation and hearing, the dismissal was upheld. The Board finds that substantive evidence of probative value supports the action taken by Carrier. The procedural objections raised by the Organization are without merit. Given Claimant's prior record, there is no basis for disturbing Carrier's discipline.

A W A R D

Claim denied.

Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTNIENT BOARD

By Order of Second Division


By
T emarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 6th day of January, 1978.