Foam 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTIvETdT BOAR Award No. 7759
SECOND DMSION :Docket No. 7687
2-I~_I~-o--CP.2-' 78





Parties to Dispute: (Carmen)



Dispute: Claim o f i'Tn;~~3.oye:.,







Findings:

The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record .road. all the evidence, finds ti-ia-l:,:

The carrier or carriers and. the e_=~;loye or a°npa_oyes involved in this d:i_spate are respectively carrier and c:::mloye within the rnear?.irl_ of the Ra.i7..;~ay Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

This Division of tire Adjustment Board r?as jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.



Claimant t,-as dz_schar,c:d on A?gust 31, 1976, following a, hearing, for being under the influence of alcohol and being asleep on duty in the I,ccx;e.r Room. Claimant's duty hours were 11: 00 p.me to 7: 00 a.m.

Earlier on the day i n question, Claimant Lad tallied to the yardmaster,
reporting, that he was Si C.^~ and was going C?Ori.e, Claimant, nevertheless .
remained on the property ad was found. asleep in tnE LOCi'_:;r Room severa,l- l'.o':1rS
later. At the ::oariny^, -the General I,ore::an stated that QaiYhant .1 .ci blood
shot eyes and a. ePrcnouaced Mra'r cf n'Lrohol. Toe General Foreman drove C7.&!~ant
to a, local hopita.1 ::here a blood sazp7_e disclosed an alcohol content in
PY_L.i'SS Oc° the .rte e~·°1 :.p,:'C:Lfi.E3c`,. by the State for u.. determination of C.;Un'1u'.a·°


t10t1.
Farm 1 Award No. 7759
Page 2 Docket No. 768'l
M&0-CM-7B

There is same disagreement as to whether C1al.niant authorized the blood sample. The hospital refused to take the blond sample without a doctor's approval, which -s:N~s obtained by the General Foreman. The record is somewhat obscure as to whether Claimant was present at the tide the doctor's permission was obtained. Claimant alleges trial while the discussion was taking place at the hospital regarding authorization to tape a, blond sample, he went outside anal drank, i~r.i:3h-ey. Fra?n the state of the record, it is difficult to determine when:ver such drinking took pince before or after 7:00 a.m., which coincides with the end of Claimant's rogular tour of duty.

Carrier k1trC'7uC2d Claimant's previous record to support its decision to dismiss Claimant from its service. The record before us does not substantiate Carrier's allegations Of l~inlkaarlt'S prior poor work 171: tOt.';J, which is based 1.cn.r,~;e1.y on hey-i.x'sa.y.


its Case so as to justify CLi:>::a.sSlntC1_`".7-::C3,nt from its service. "'he Y'c'.CC?:.~'(;.
with respect t0 Claimant's ')x'-.Or transgressions, 7_f any, is confusing and.
lacks probative support.

Claimant's co:-aduca o11 the day in question, however, appears to have
been n ~ ~ Yr. l n., < i a?° fro.': exe.:~r_1_a3°y. ''s.rec:ia:1_ly in this industry, e_..o_.t: :-Gr~..a must
comply rigorously and consistently with p.,.~escri:oc:d standards o1 personal
bC':1aViOr and work attitudes and jOJ p^o:Lor_:3.Y1C2. 11=ployee safety and
safety are paramount CUk1aiC.ae· nt:i_OnS :!.n the ra111"C:3.d industry, a5 1S, of
course, efficient, operations.

Although the record :in this case is somewhat confused, :i.'t :i_s clear that Claimant's behavior nerits censure and some degree of discipline, but not the sanction of dis;:ia;:rge. We will dir;~c.t that Clair,_a11t be returned to ~'.or.~> without pay for time lost but with the ster_l warning to Claimant that we consider his conduct as seriously deficient in the attributes of a responsible erylo;;roe. Claimant is hereby advised that insofar as this Carrier -W involved, 'ire 1S walking 7115 last mile; in other words, this is his last C1-7-.:'.,nC:E:. This 1S t0 serve as a final warning t0 Claimant that repetition of .he actions and behavior which gave rise to
., this proceeding v,xn. 33_l justly ,t-)ut leis job in jeaPar'dy. Any f'u:~tL~er transgressions Cpl the type that led to this case, or failure properly t0 perform hi 3 dll`G',' in the u:i;L11'C will constitute proper tend sufficient cause for discr_w,sE;`. A copy of this Award is to be delivered personally to Claimant as well as being placed in his personnel file.

The decision in this case is not to be dee:r:ed nor construed to sexv as precedent for cases 1i1VUi.V:in; other employees found in Si'_:llr.r C1Y'Ci7_a.'ta't:''..11::C::.j _"t. is cpL)l=.C::....ia only to the instant case.




Form Z Award No. 7759
Page 3 Docket ~~o. 7687
2-B&.-0-c',I'i- ` 78
NATIONAL RAILROAD YlWJUSTITlN'I 13C).hD
By Order of Second Div:isien

Attest: Executive Secz,etary
National Railroad Adjustment Boazd




~..v~ ` S `W '__~ ~~ ,.. > 1 i _~' r ~ -i i , r . ' r n

Dated at Chiea.go, ll_l~inoi.s, this 2~th clay cry.' ~doven:ber; 1978.