Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTi.'IETv'I' BOARD Award No. `1777
 . SECOT%;D DIVISION Docket No. 7631
 2-I CG-NIA- "T8



Parties to Dispute: (

Dispute: Claim of FiTiployes:

 That the Illinois Central- Gulf Railroad violated Rule 39 of the Schedule "A" Agreement made betwee:n, the Illinois Central Gulf Railroad and the International Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO, when they discharged bd. L. Stevens from duty at the end of his tour of duty on September 15, 1976.












Findings:
The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

 The carrier or 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 27_, 193.

 This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
Foam 1 Award No. 77
 Page 2 Docket No. 7631
 2-ICG-MA-'78

 Claimant, a Machinist at Carrier's Mechanical Department's facility at Vicksburg, Mi ssissippi, was arrested at RayVi.7.le, Louisiaroa, the evening of August 17, 1.976, Claimant's off day. He was charged wI.th driving while intoxicated and being without a drivers license. Claimant was incarcerated in the Richland Parish Jail until August 21, J_976. Claimant Machinist failed to report to work August 18, 19, 2_0 and cl, 1976. Claimant also failed to info. anyone that he would be absent or to seek permission therefor.

 Claimant reported to work August 25, 1976. A formal investigation 'eras held, Septezrbex 3, 1976 to determine "whether you absenlced yourself without proper authority fxon, your assignrnent in the Vicksburg Roundhouse August 18, 19, 20 and 21,"

 Carrier concluded as a result thereof -that Claimant "was guilty as charged". After a review of his service record Claimant was dismissed as discipline therefor.






Claimant suffers here from the results of' his own actions. Any unexcused absence from dirty is a violation of Rule 23. The Rule does recognize that situations may arise wlien it would not be possible to first request permission for an absence. Such would represent a mitigating circumstance. Howeve)°, such circ.u.::-,siance must necessarily be free of an -individual's fault. Here, Claimant's own actions resulted in his arrest and confinement. As pDinted out :in Third Division Award 6572 (Wyckoff)

This Division has frequently held that incarceration does not constitute an unavoidable absence from work. See Award 1508, Y+689 and 6606.

 C1_aimarAt was accorded a prompt and fair hearing. He was capably represented.

 I
 Foam 1 Award No. 7777
 Page 3 Docket No. 7631
 2-IC G-r4A-' 78

 The evidence adduced at the hearing was sufficient to support Carrier's conclusion as to Claimant's culpability.

 The use of an employee's service record, after a conclusion of guilt has otherc-,ri^e been prop;-xly established fox the purpose of determining the degree of discipline to be assessed, is beyond sound and reasonable ax_;a::1ent. It is the one, if not the only, n,_ca%.Y:;~ C?:i deveil;ii.l:i:?g JTc'ca.sOn.`~,OIE: discipline, Cl&iltMant' S record an alJsCiltCeiSm and 1't1tGXlcan'GS are such as -to 1TaylZ. the conclusion that the discipline assessed herein eras not uareasonable. The Claim will be denied without the necessity of our reaching and passing on the various ya.x ts of claim as made. Such par't,s are deemed to be without any rule support.






Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 e°~ ,.~

 ~°` x1~semarie*L;rasch Assistant
 Date.at Chicago, Illinois', this 20th day of December, 1978.

 I