Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUST?ENT BOARD Award No.
7538
SECOT~jD DIVISION Docket No.
7446
2-AT&SF-FO-'78
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Theodore H. O'Brien when award was rendered.
( System Federation No.
97,
Railway Employes'
( Department, A. F. of L. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute:
( (Firemen & Oilers)
(
(Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company
Dispute: 'Clai-n of Employes.:
(1) That the Carrier erred and violated the contractual rights of
William E. Tanksley when they removed him from service on
December
3, 1975.
(2) That, therefore, Mr. Tanksley be returned to service with all
rights, privileges and benefits restored..
(3)
That he be made whole for all health and welfare benefits,
pension benefits, unemployment and sickness 'benefits and aniy
other benefits lie would have earned had he not been removed from
service.
. (4) Further, that he be compensated for all lost time, including
overtime and. holiday pay and that such lost tine be counted as
vacation cquwlifying time.
Findings:
The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and
all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and -the eanploye or 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.
Claimant was a regularly assigned hourly rated hostler helper employed
by the Carrier with a seniority date of November
3, 1973.
On Dec-Tber- 3,
1975,
an investi-ration was held to determine facts and place responsibility,
if any, concemi.n~`; Cl"mwnt's al_le,-ed violation
of
Rule 32 - G of the General
Rules for the Guidance of Employes,
1975,
Revised, ~,oxm
2626
Standard As a
Form 1 - Award No. 7538
Page 2 Docket No.
7446
2-AT&SF-FO-'78
result of the investigation, the Claimant was removed from service. A
prior investigation had been held on November 18,
1975
due to Claimant's
alleged violation of Rules 13 and
15
of the General Rules for the Guidance
of Employes, Form 2626 Standard, Revised
1975.
As a result of this investigation, the Claimant was assessed 20 demerits, which brought him over the
limit of sixty (60) demerits, and subjected him to dismissal under Rule 32-G.
Claimant's accumulation of demerits brought about the December 3,
1975
investigation, and as a result of testimony adduced at that investigation,
Claimant was removed from Carrier's service.
It is the Organization's position that Rule 18l of the General Agreement
governs discipline procedure, and that said rule does not provide that an
employe may be dismissed from service upon accumulation of sixty (60)
demerits. The Organization asserts, therefore, that Carrier's dismissal of
the Claimant under Rull a 32-G of 7 orm 2626 Standard should be made void by
this Board, since Rule 32 is improper and illegal. The Organization further
asserts that Claimant's dismissal was excessive discipline due to the
unjust assessment of twenty (20) demerits as result of the November 18,
1975
investigation.
It is the Carrier's position that the petitioning Organization never
entered an appeal on the property for the twenty demerits assessed Claimant
in connection with the November
18, 1975
investigation, and therefore, no
appeal concerning the results of the investigation can be made before this
Board. It is the Carrier's position that the instant claim involves
Claimant's alleged violation of pule 32-G of Form 2626 Standard, and his
subsequent removal from service as a result of an investigation held on
December
3, 1975;
not the assessment of twenty demerits as a result of tile
November
18, 1975
investigation.
The instant claim as presented to this Board, states that the Carrier
violated Claimant's contractual rights when they removed him from service
on December 3,
1975.
The issue to be addressed by this Board is the
Claimant's removal from service, due to an accumulation of demerits, as a
result of the testimony heard at the December 3,
1975
investigation. This
Board will not address the issues involved in the assessment of the demerits
over the period of time prior to Claimant's removal from service.
As a result of the formal investigation field on December 3,
1975,
the
Claimant was removed from the service of the Carrier for violation of
Rule 32-G of the General Rules for the Guidance of Lnployes, Form 2626 StandaM;
Revised
1975.
Rule 32-G reads as follows:
"Is'mployes' ;records will be balanced at least once each ,year
and as often as necessary to keep record up to date in the
matter of merits and demerits. A balance of sixty demerits
subjects an employe to dismissal.
I
Form 1
Page
3
Award No. 7538
Docket No.
74146
2-AT&SF-FO-'78
Testimony adduced at the investigation on December
3,
1975 revealed that the
Claimant had accumulated a total of sixty-five (65) demerits, and that
Claimant had received a vrarning letter, dated February 10, 1975, advising him
that his record stood at fifty (50) demerits, and that an accumulation of
sixty (60)
demerits subjects an employe to dismissal.
A careful exanination of the record before us proves that there is
substantial evidence to support Carrier's removal of Claimant from service.
The Claimant had knowledge of the rule subjecting hil-a to dismissal from
service upon accumulation of sixty
(60)
demerits. Claimant received a
warning letter informing him that his record had reached fifty (50) demerits.
Further, Claimant k-gad received both merit and demerit marr:s under the
provisions of Rule 32, therefore, he was well aware of the system of.
discipline as explained in Rule 32 of Form 2626 Standard. Upon a thorou.o,h
reading of the record, we have concluded ti:%t Carrier's action -in rerovin
Claimant from service for having accumulated more than the maximum nu_zoer
of demerits allowed under Rule 32-Cx of the General Rules for the Guidance
of Emt)loyes was not arbitrary or unreasonahle. Accordingly, we shall deny
the claim.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADd'LTSTT.'ILT~1' BOAT;I?
By Order of Second Division
semarie Brasch"- AdjnniWtr~4-t,'~ie hssi.stanU;
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 19th day of May, 1978.