Form l NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJISTT·ZENT BOARD Award
Eb.
7603
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
793
2-CR-CM-78
The Second Division consisted of the regular modbexs and in
addition Referee Abraham Weiss when award was tendered.
( System Federation No. 109, Railway Employes'
( Department, A. F. of L - C. I. 0.
Patties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)
( Consolidated Rail Corporation
Dispute: Claim of Ehployes:
1. That under the controlling Agreement, Car Cleaner Gary Lucas was
arbitrarily and unjustly dismissed from service on 1.ratch 12,
1976.
2. That accordingly, the Carrier be ordered to return Car Cleaner
G. Lucas to service with pay fox all time lost beginning March 13,
1976.
3.
Further, that the Carrier be o0dered to restore Can Cleaner G.
Lucas's seniority, vacation and sickness benefits; and thai: the
Carrier be required to pay any and all billstha (, have develoOed
for Hospital, Medical, Surgical. and Doctor bills as a resu_-,_t of
losing coverage under Health
~~.a ;%,
elfare D 1 e.ns ;,rnen i-mope r :i y
taken out of service. In addition, if this Carrier is gronVA the
right to deduct any earnings in outside c;Tloynent, they
be
required to oral>e full pa~naents to the Railroad.
r
etirune nt Board
for this period so 'what 1'h'.
J~',ZC~j.S 'Will
continue ii1_S rcti1a:.ne:~t
credits anti his une:aployment and sickness benefits under this
Act.
FAndings
The Second Division
of
the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record an;
all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier ox carriers and -the enploye or emiployes involved in this
dispute are respectively carrier and employe irithin -the meaning of the
Railway Labor Act as approved June 2'1,
1934.
This Division of the Adjuntme nt Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispute waived. right of appearance at heating thereon.
Form l Award No.
7603
Page 2 Docket No.
093
2-CR-CM-178
Claimant in this case was a car cleaner at Carrier's Elizabethport,
New Jersey passenger car shop. At the time of his dismissal from service
on March 12,
1976
he had been employed fob si~t~Xoxi~:2ately 14 months. During
the period from January
9, 1976
to I,'ebiuax^T
26, 1976,
clai::ant eras absent
from work, lace reporting to work, ox left work early on thirteen (13)
scparate occasions. Claimant stated that; most of his absences were due to
illness, but offered no proof that he eras, in fact, unable to work because
of illness.
Out review of the record substantiates Carrier's contention that
claimant was not a dependable employee during the period in question and
that discipline was, in fact, justified and requited. But discipline is
not imposed for purposes of retribution only. Discipline is also imposed
to secure efficient operation and to spun emDloyee correction and
improvement. This Board has previously stated.:
"Discipline generally has three goals: iunishx::ent of an
employee, correction and training of the employee, and as
an for
't-r~.' in '~
'' .P
? a
other employes ...."
ex~y:rle ,_.n_.n. for . v.r oscs
r ,.
(Third Division Award. Iio.
19537
- Lied>eri2an)
In this case it is our hope that the. tine claimant, has been owi, of
service will have accomplished all three of the goals previously raetiticned.
WiLh that thou~-°h'~ in :mind, we ;;'i.l i oi,dcr that cl -.~izxant be ,reinstated to
· ..r
restored,
-I-' r~
.t_
service 'f~T.L'GY1 scniority ~'~.~;l:i.,:but
Z^Titi. C711t
pay
:''C%
r the ~ tN,.1^ 10ss
We are also co~:peLLed to counsel claimant that we consid.~:
cthis
to be iris
final opportunity to learn that Ca;:rier need not retain in its employ
those indivi duals
who
are vn,illing to sinoZT up for work retiO.arly and
punctnaLiy and Z;Jr~v their full shift during their assigned hours of '4Tork.
Prompt and pem_onent dismissal will be appropriate if claimant in the
future, returns to his ex'r aub v:-,ys.
Claim sustained as per i1indinz;s.
KATIONAL RA-TJROAD DjTTSTi,"~F'I%rr BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
Na'ti.oz~:a Failroad Adjustment Board
F
.-W19semarae Brasch -- AU1?1inistra.tive
Assi
s°S.aDated at Chicago, Illinois., this 14th day of July,
1978.