Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No.
7+56
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
7255
2-sPT-Ew-`78
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee David P. Twomey when award was rendered.
( System Federation No.
114,
Railway Employes'
Department, A. F. of L. - C. 1. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Electrical Workers)
(
( Southern Pacific Transportation Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That under the current agreement, Mechanical Department Electrician,
J. T. Hunt was unjustly treated when he was removed from service
on April
4, 1975
allegedly account being in violation of Rules
801
and
804
of the General Rules and Regulations of the Southern
Pacific Transportation Company (Pacific Lines).
2. That accordingly, the Carrier be ordered to:
(a) Restore the aforesaid employe to service, with all service
and seniority rights unimpaired, compensate him for all
time lost and with payment of
6%
interest added thereto.
(b) Pay employe's group medical insurance contributions, including
group medical disability, dependents' hospital, surgical and
medical and death benefit premiums for all tune that the
aforesaid employe is held out of service.
(c) Reinstate all vacation rights to the aforesaid employ e.
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 or 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.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
Claimant J. T. Hunt entered the service of the Carrier on May 11,
1973,
as an Electrician at the Locomotive Plant, E1 Paso, Texas. He was dismissed
from the service of the Carrier by letter dated April
4, 1975,
reading:
vo
I%w
F oxm 1 Award No . 7+56
Page
2,
Docket No.
7255
2-sPr-Ew-'78
"Mr. J T. Hunt - Electrician
E1 Paso, Texas
Evidence adduced in formal hearing conducted in
E1 Paso, Texas, March 11 thru March
19, 1975
established
your responsibility for participating in an unauthorized
work stoppage of the Company's service at E1 Paso, Texas,
February 10,
1975.
Your actions in this instance were in violation of Rule
801, that part reading:
'Employes will not be retained in the service
who are..., indifferent to duty, ... or who
conduct themselves in a manner which would
subject the railroad to criticism.'
Rule
804,
that part reading:
'Arty act of hostility, misconduct or wilful
disregard or negligence affecting the
interests of the Company will not be condoned...'
of the General Rules and Regulations of the Southern Pacific
Transportation Company, Form s-2292, as posted.
For reasons stated you are hereby dismissed from the service
of the Southern Pacific Transportation Company.
Please acknowledge receipt of this letter by affixing your
signature to the attached copy and arrange to turn in any
passes or Company owned equipment to the Plant Manager's
Office, El Paso.
s/ M. Gogol"
The burden of proof is on the Carrier to demonstrate, with substantial
evidence of record, that the Claimant was guilty of the offense upon which
the disciplinary penalty of dismissal was based. The Carrier contends
that the Claimant's guilt and responsibility for violation of Rule 801 and
Rule
804,
as a consequence of his participation and leadership in the
unauthorized work stoppage, was conclusively established in certain excerpt;
of testimony from the hearing record. We conclusively disagree. We can
find no substantial evidence in the entire transcript or in the Submission
and Rebuttal of the Carrier that would show that the Claimant participated
in or provided the leadership for the work stoppage at the Locomotive Plant,
E1 Paso, Texas on February 10, 1975. We are compelled to sustain this claim.
The Claimant shall b e reinstated with his seniority rights unimpaired. He
shall be compensated for the wage loss resulting from the wrongful dismissal;
mro
Form 1
Page
3
Award No..
7456'
Docket No.
7255
2-sPr-Ewt78
and we find it appropriate, under Rule
39
for outside earnings to be
deducted in computing the compensation due. The Agreement makes no provision
for an interest payment and such is not allowed. Claim 2(b) for pay for
group medical insurance contributions is disallowed as lacking Agreement
support, as per a long line of Awards. Concerning Claim 2(c), vacation
rights, the Carrier states that Claimant was allowed all vacation pay to
which he was entitled prior to discharge and Carrier asserts that there are
no other vacation rights which could flow from the Vacation Agreement.
However, vacation rights which accrued as a result of Claimant's reinstatement
will be governed by applicable vacation agreement provisions.
A W A R D
Claim sustained as per findings.
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
semarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 7th day of February, 1978.
1400
,me