Foam 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTiEl`1T BOARD Award No. 7919
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7626
2-A&,S-SM-' 79





Parties to Dispute:




Dispute: Claim of Employes:





















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 employer involved in this dispute axe respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1Q34.
Foam 1 Award No. 7919
Page 2 Docket No. 7626
2-AYxS-SM-' 79

This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.



Claimant, on June 30, 197, had been employed as a Sheet Metal Worker for some seven (7) years and was working the third shift, L1:00 PM to 7:00 AM at Carrier's East St. Louis Mechanical facility.

Carrier's Special Agent observed two persons, later determined to be Claimant and another employee removing merchandise which had spilled out of a trailer and onto a flat car on which the trailer. was loaded. The other employee was on the flat car and he handed boxes, later found to contain hibachis, down to Claimant who was observed placing ^, carton of such merchandise in the trunk of his automobile, closing the trunk and driving away from the location of the trailer and flat car. Said Chief Special Agent contacted another Carrier Patrolman and directed him to intercept this car.

Carrier patrolman stopped Claimant's vehicle and waited until the Chief Special Agent and a Tx°ainmaster arrived at the location of the car. They identified themselves to the driver of that car, Mr. hugene Stanford, the Claimant herein, a Sheet Metal Worker and an on-duty employee of this Carrier. Claimant eras requested to open the trunk of his car and did so. Therein was found the box which had been taken from trailer ?MOZU 290988. In this box was later found three port2.ble barbeque grills ox' hibachis.

Claimant, who had been advised of his constitutional rights, was taken by the police to Carrier's General Office Building. Subsequently, Claimant requested to talk to one of the Patrolmen and in his presence made and signed a written statement which implicated several other employees. Claimant implicated the Car Foreman, who, according to such statement, said that he wanted tyro hibachis, two Machinists and a Caboose Supply Man, who, incidentally was the other employee observed in the act of passing two boxes down from inside the trailer. Cla:i.smant's voluntary statement was signed by Claimant, witnessed by the Chief Special Agent and the Patrolman, at 2:00 AM on July 1, 1976, some 2 1/2 hours after Claimant was first observed loading the box of merchandise into the trunk of his car.

A subsequent inspection by the police of the employee's locker room uncovered seven hibachis. The locker of one of the employees incriminated by Claimant was inspected and three hibachis were found therein, two of which were still in boxes. Claimant and four other employees, the Caboose Supply Man, two Machinists and the Car Foreman, were given the follow-Ing notice of investigation:
Form 1 Award No. 7919
page 3 Docket NO. 7626
2-A&S-SM-'79
"Arrange to report to the Alton and Southern Railway
Company Conference Room, 1000 South Twenty-Second
Street, Fast St. Louis, Illinois, at 9:00 At4, Wednesday,
July 7, 1976 for formal investigation to develop the
facts and place your responsibility, if any, in
connection with the rer^oval of merchandise from Container
No. MOLU 2GOy88 on Car flAX 9X+353 located on the Rip
Runner Track directly adjacent to Mlechanical Building
Lunch Room at or about L1:50 f~ June 30, 19(6."

As a result of the investigation, which concluded on August 17, 1976, Carrier determined that Claimant had responsibility and on August 20, 1876, he was advised:





This is a companion claim to that in Docket 7622 wh~s_eh resulted in this Bo-ard's Award No. 7918. The Board finds that C7_wizrant was accorded all the procecllmral rights set forth in Rule 19 of the applicable Agreement. Claimant was given proper notice, he eras represented, he elected not to call any witnesses and he did participate in the investigation by answering questions, making statements and questioning witnesses both personally and through his representative.

The Board finds that sufficient competent evidence was adduced to support: Carrier's conclusion as to Claimant's culpability. Here, Claimant on the night of June 30, 1976 was observed in the act of participating in the theft of merchandise from a container car which had been entrusted to his employer for shipment. A search of his autoTrobile, in the presence of witnesses, disclosed the box that Claimant had been observed placing in the trtzn:: of his car. Later, Claimant voluntarily gave a written statement, witnessed by police officers, which implicated employees other than she Caboose Supply I~Tan, who had been previously observed in the act of passing boxes down to Claimant. Despite efforts by Claimant to recant his written statement the record is sufficient to support the conclusions reached by Carrier.

This Board will not substitute its judgment for that of Carrier where, as here, sufficient evidence eras adduced to sLZppox-t the conclusion that the offense with which Claimant i,~s charF ed vas i n fact committed. Claimants act of participating in the theft of goods entrusted to his unployer strikes a blow at the stability of the Company and the security of his fellow employees. His dishonest act weakens the confidence that the shippers must
Form 1 Page

Award No. 7919
Docket No. 7626
2-Arms-sM-'79

hold in Carrier's ability to safely deliver merchandise entrusted to it. It likewise strikes at a fundamental basis of the employer-employee relationship, to wit - honesty. We find that the discipline of dismissal to be not excessive or unreasonable. In such circUnstances this claim will be denied. In view of these findings the Board merely notes that Part II of the Claim has no foundation and authority in the Agreement. Thus, the Board would otherwise have no authority to pass on the specified items in Part II of the Statement of Claim.

A W A R D

Claim denied.

Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

NATIOIT.4T, RAIhROU ADJUSTiETJT BOARD

By Order of Second Division


By
`.~.~einarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

Dated ~t Chicago, Illinois, this 16th day of May, 1979.