Form l TMZONAL f;IT~RC)AD 1~DJLT;JTPTI`rT ):>Cl.'~.L~D Award To. 7606
;1iC0i111
Docket No. 7539
2-SC L..-C°fl- '78

The Second Division consisted of the regular members and :in addition Referee Irwin I~ Irlebernan when award ~,Yk~ rendered.

' ( System, Federation To. 4-2, R<jilyay Employes'

( he,puctm~:nt, A _. . of L. - . r . T. 0.

J_

( Seabonyd Coast Line Railroad ComTa;.t.T

L)ispute:___ Cla~in of tin_~i.:°V`~_

That l'..nC.._:1` the cur'..onv a_,ycei;nl:tt Caiman T. l''. Phody v-s unusti',,,J'

Suspended from the sei.';rice of tho Seaboard Coast Line Railroad

COar.part;Y, f.').'O`t =. 0ctCybei' ",.G-I, 1.975 ,i:i'<^..u-"'ru l:(-:l:r,her .l_m; _:)'~`,

inC,fUS~-R.°'C,. J`his act~_on Z~'hs u.nj-at,i,, unfair, <~:.2`~i`t·.c.`.~.'V, and

c ap L i c :i On. u .

Tt'1at .Lc 'Q 7nS1y the SC".-'~b;1 1 J' ' ~'._._.'~'' ~f 3

'd Cans~ Lit?~ ~t~.~ i i o~,d Cc.~.;cn.n e

C)Y'C~.C"'°e ,~s_'-y, CcYi.":_< ~i Z:_<~iZ r, *,~ 5' .q.;-, eight,

.C"'°e to CC;>, :f7;e~,~_,"~. i." :_< ~iZ 1 ?u. ur~ia.~r for five five ()~ .,, ~

(O) hours euch~ day-, r"'C. his CU.1:`~i1:~L2t ; rata C;`_ X) :2y

. Also c:tly overtime he may ~1ha·Fo made and 1"ei >ene-.-'`_., u._. cruing to h_v

'.11.l. G'` benefits ..

position that: 'le TI1::,~ hr?.L`e lost.

Fi ndinq1F Second Division of h stm '" Ward, nt r a ..
1 C.e.n n. W .11 dm .~i:.;~.P~_~; upon upon :1 the 11._=? .. whole .. 2'i.C:C_-.`~ e~.j~c;
all "the cvicie,,,ce, f-1n d_s t hnt:

The carrier or carrier.; ana the empAoye or e:a_p=lr~;,y_s invo Ved in "tip) s

dispute are reopect._.vc.~;y c`trricr and cmplt^vC witnl..n the .:i:;<::Y'.~_nr; OJi' tLe Rail~'Ta y T,`_d~or Act ..._s approved u'Jn,,_ 21, 1930 .

This Division of the Ati.ju:stvnt Board h^.S jurisdiction over the d'y spui::. involved herein.

Parties to said dispute waived r'__gnt of appei?rancE; i?.t

li;il,r:1-1";L 'tr;~ t."~.<?i:d.

This 1..s a disciplinary dispute 11"? which Claimu,nv received a 7'1',`°

day suspension. C.V 1rant was C.il.'rrgod with and .j.U:~:.J_ -`li:f._l_'G`y of erqiJQ,.,

Zo.' `.`1

in other . inl:~,;l e; :p-n;;zeni:, while Absent MY his regular as-iCunaat;Y-
o11 Septe1'iher 6, 1975. i__ was charged with vlola:t1Un of 1 L~.i a 18(a), which provide. Es fellows:

" (a) when idle requi ren"A_> of the service Wi1a permit, employees, (:~i7, request, v1l . be g"ran1;C'd leave tl~ abSC=2 for ,L limited t7:.. , with 1xivilcge of renewal. An ell'Vlolce anent en leave who a",ges in other En117loyme nt v.l' lose `: is seniority, unless pedal

Form. Z Award T?o. 766
Page DochL' t !,C:. 7739
2-' CT -CM-' (3
iJJ 1
11 .1. 1_

pxrvi-lions shall have been made therefor by the proper official and Cetzefal Mi`trr=on r..^pNesetrting his craft.

The fact,"

n;t in dispute. 7d~I a " .,Ytt fcCy`ae-l`'e·,L and Z:c_S

-. , e t...~indicated . that C~_~,irr.!~... _."~,irr.!~. .._. _.

granted permission to be absent from his a:signzen-'t on September C , 1575
for personal buslncLs l`."eaFCrns (unspecifica). _t wa,c also undisluteii that

»< had '·'t·- ~. ~, -~ -3. . .. .» of cunt)`%:.~: v~f.2'- fo- -YTyr'>. on daese7 en.. ;inns

for the Iii . 'a yd. otne,'_ cc;rp.nies in the areaa.' Co.~7,~ -~.. ~ ~: ,

Currier based :fps c %ne:iwc. ans in this case on tun elennnt: . a v i s:i to take site of G`,1`:. ';'_. the pri', 'te coat an.L ELF; for KIM Claimant htud been working an the ' .g . ~ ._-- e :~ (Mi ..;,'G ?'I;il.G,1 tj.?'?C 'G;,TO S~?~..~ "z'':_..'U~.r ~.zy~.

'lYt .the ._.~W" ~ill_ ._- ,of ' o~ _~' ..

.~ _ l._ , t elephone~LC'~f.'Y'v."_._'C~'x of the 1M.`date CG:i ny who .ri'rffled that !;_.,.,. tr haG_ benn
.._ (f~ there ~:'- `>':l:i- )" This was s,uDpIw_, *tc: at the he ... ~_!?_
~aar:r.:in:, u. f~v'e on i;_::e ~:,,h , ~ ~.. _ e

7 E,_t~

~..,.-tY ~.. y,., - 'i',7 '' c.:7. .'.?' :. md. 's:il'....t'.'i. 'hi.ef'E: f)u Se i.it`,.:.^~)C. .
the private c.,: -:~,, ..ndica-c,~. _ ..hat _:L'

i,, ."_\ rgi __ _ r- A. ,,,y- _ not given a Mir il-4.).'.i?'' and

Carrier did no. '!tS , bywo?71 of" 1:1.` __Ltox'.

sustain " "' j '1p r.'fiC.i ~ .tl ui .' :"

We ado quite :nnce1`n;d v_i.N Vie ..._.,_.^." in Alach this bearing was

C:-oC; The transcript C- ...?r' A.'eRQ t-1-on L'evculs that Pet Mnle:?.
^9v.,'t:~11C'w..' ~.
objected an at lennt .r_.

cr

by the C':'11 _ _ .r_ ·, ,_ . 'han.. l _,._, Brat __:1 ·.-_..1. M.
J'~' .l.=.;<1:r;':i i1L_ ~.~:...,:1. ~.._ 'f. '_.'~a o_ .c· '%Y. ._~_ Y..e _ 'fir -

- _ _ ...,...r.. l-_ . h _.y., private co°:' . __.

.introduction _7'? fr .n ordMOat . s that the hearing officer In bot,ht instances moral-,,

stated that tha: CQ! :i'.icas ,.Te..e noted. o: the '1'':'l:O;:C%. ..',:.._ p?.'UceeC1.ed to
permit _ . .o .e --M .ei Y o`·bje%t'i-ca ., "Tent to .1:.Je p"oi; l4
t.".-._

~.ill. ~ ... _._y on n,1w issue no'd uniCc,t·uble Rtd. withw'-'IJ Vhc . 1i "., u'~_ :i' v.as F"Nysny ocross M_ 1 1·f- ,es The hPa_ -I?` officer i._, chi : _.;t

L 1.` , _ ; _ o. ,o _ t_ a .i-._ y_ , n! %__ tial' roves .in U-m:,
,a c _ -ta

-- ' ,-1 ., ~Z~ ) T.,. 't = _r' _t'ecCP YI J.:., ... that

axe t:.~J :.:~1~, y?' _~t,o f."t,'' 1?.'~_ c. . .. li.~.

-·a .^yi; ,a i' l.ri"-·.. l., `tn ,':h l ch -Anna! ral,... of ev''-Orne <`-;,'1'_'e follo1'T.G` . it ._ ...
._ Ia.. .· C:. . . ..
i nCZI?-!it.tC;t"!'~ on E6 hearing o1 f nn'1'-. Liiai ot r'f' 1111ob"C for the record!!

:officer ,: ·Odo i.~_.'C. ~.~

7., s, us 74 'i . ,tluas ..Y'<: made 1, _: Q u ai'. :whions and testimony offered.
W'1J.en ti-tE: i"l'..,'~.,-;.:i.' 1"_ ro_elg recorded, the hears-, officer is, in fact,

-<-h, .t- 'I

response to a q' of iaonce1"-1.: the evidence -,was j'eq?i:.,

reel;

1!,~..`.:':r"L.1?.,''' 'G~_~ rL ions.

the hea.,r:ia cf.u:ic. _. c._ in (-;b i eC .: _,

Z?,·p i_icit i n this dispute -4''..-_ .o Cuec..1on of f_:1_ udIl)i_i.ity findings,

by the hCaI'ing Micer. 'sty. founts in behalf K the Carrier posh Ton.

.'11 h dal'. :i" l·. ..:!oil.' C; 'n -" pr.one convernK- ion ..'''C:. i3, t'a'it-I_,en .: irat C... aw1:

from _ _y .,v:-.(, ry·-,Yg1u ,·U'i.0_.. ..i-Jr _..:.ir.'L'. thou the direct testimony ._i."L'
three the ryr 7 ... .~ t__ _ · t~r .
_ ,,~ .._t.. ·.'.i.~.._:_ut quartiionQ ,.hn ?.''.H U_h the heii,Y'%ci off-i.C. ..n
.a.a .a:i:i.__..:... _n~.r._. t, " ~. t _ -
rake ·Y' aKili f: ndj. - .,..r _.... clear that he relied heavily on the
written .t_-,? ' ~ ^ lipha introduction :-o:!' nal -irK~

r

.written ~a:,~a~^c~,.. r~^c~,..r~ ~!~j'~'cv_~:~f~j'~'cv_~:~ to by :t,i'~;'ict~..._. .

form 1 Award No. j6C6
Page 3 Docket No. I>.9
2-SCZ-CM- 78
weight accorded. that docrunent wi~l~?~.-£; the x; gljcc of cx'css aTx°nin~t:_o1::s'~;:~s

per se hiE1iLy- prejudicial to CJ.a_....:vnt (see Awards 6083 and 6463cat°cful review o1 the record of the in'V:stQat10n also reveals

that Carrier did not present substantial E aril c"uce upcn which to Mau SO conclusion ()t toguj2tr Carrier t_as failed Go .ustnin the burden o prow

,I

upon which the discipline ..as baced (see Auarcin ?!-0'+6, 609 and 7172, mnon~°
host oz o"vn-V:-s) .

Va.I conclus:.On tr,,-e1oY`c :7. > thRt the Clair, must 1.)e sustained G1:!.

three grouniio. that the heaping ().L:. officer erred in the conduct of the
hearing; that Claimant vas de_1c".. the. Y'7,;'='L of cios:., E:~_~, _:!::,~;;G`'_O'c1 on
`^'-' :,a' _. Tr.v r.- rF>'l.c rc» ',ii ·i;; 1 is An <;e - .t .r .r_ ' h C, ';a... er
failed to sustain 02 burden of piwof.

A U .A li

c.La'i=?I susta:1.li'ed.

1'ThT!_l~li.r~.~_~ 11VCLT-1VKE)

~~L'.: iT,.l_A`~1.; L~ Iw_~5~'D

-,_~ [Att,~'st: Ji;euativC-' hoc:.::1"C:~.. 'V

'[·' _ - ^<:: Ada c·t. int ho,

hos L:,. .,. ...2 A1OS.,N

Dated at Ti:.C' ._. r, 11M,v1 S, iG?1__~S, j.~;-'~,1~ __:3.y o~:7_y~ :~ ~'u.
!! R
Uk 1w C u .° 'i

.~,~BOR MEMBER'S ANSWER TO CARRIER MEMBERS' DISSENT TO

~fC~
AUG AWARD NO. 7606, DOCKET NO. 7539

'_..I ~;~ t1 0~ 9 have reviewed Carrier Members' dissent to Award No. 7606 and submit it has no sound basis.

Certainly the author of the written statements was available for cross examination. The fact that a statement was given is indication the author was cooperative with the Carrier. And, as stated in the record, there were two employes involved with the same name as Claimant. The statement was unclear and everthing but precise. It could have been cleared up through cross examination. Second Division Awards 6083 and 6463 properly hold that cross examination of those bearing witness against you to be a fundamental right.

We agree with the Majority that a fair hearing requires more than a mere notation when an objection is raised. There should be at the lease sufficient discovery to determine the validity of the objection.

We believe the Findings in Award No. 7606, Docket No. 7539 to be sound and concur therewith.

C. E. Wheeler

Labor Member