Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTPENT BOARD Award No. 7888
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7803
2-C&NW-CM-' 79



( System Federation No. 76, Railway Employes'
( Department, A. F. of L. -- C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)
(
(Chicago and North Western Transportation Company

Dispute: Claim of Hnr)los es












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 21, 193+.

This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisd:ictirn over the dispute involved herein.



Claimant is a Coach Cleaner employed for ap.proxin:ately two years prior to this dispute. He received a thirty-day disciplinary suspension for being "absent without proper notification or permission" on April 20, 21, and 22, 1977, in violation of established rules governing attendance and notification of absence.

An investigative hearing developed the information teat Claimant had reported off on April 13 because of a dentist's visit. The Carrier has no record of report-off calls by telephone on April 20-22, although C1aLmant alleges that calls were made cn his behalf. Clainant alleged that he was under a doctor's care from April 11 through May 2, 1977, and apparently read from a medical note to this effect at the hearing. x';1111 a invited to submit the note as evidence, both during and subsequent to the hearing, he
Form 1 Page 2

Award No. 7888

Docket No. 7803

2-C&1V4J-CM-' 79


failed to do so. Testimony farther shows that on April 11, he had reported off because he was "out of tov-n", but no connection between this and his alleged illness was established at the hearing.

The Board finds no basis on which to question the Carrier's conclusion that the Claimant had failed to take the necessary steps to protect his assigturent on the three days in question. The testimony as to illness and confinement at home was contradicted by the earlier excuses given for absence on April 11 and April 19.

The Organization argues that the Claimant did not receive a fair hearing as required by the Agreement. The Board does not agree. References to the previous absence record were not used to determine the Claimant's guilt for April 2C-22, It is proper to z:iake reference to the past record of an e-mploye

in determining the severity of a disciplinary penalty. In this :instance, the record shows that the Claimant had received three letters of reprimand and a verbal reprixaand, all as to absenteeism and tardiness and all within one year of the currently imposed 30-day suspension.

The Organization claims that the doctor's note, referred to above, was in the hearing record and should have been relied upon. To the contrary, the Claimant failed to submit it for the record.

A WAR D

Claim denied.

Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTh7ENT BOARD

By Order of Second Division




,,osor,-eanarie BrascY? - Administrative Assistant

Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 4th day of April, 197.