Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTPENT BOARD Award No,
8037
SECOND DIVISION Docket No,
765
2-SOU-CM-' 79
The Second Division consisted of the regLi.lax· nmvnbers and
in
addition Referee George S. Roukis when award was rendered.
System Federation No. 21, Railway Employes'
Department, A, F, of L. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: (Carmen)
( Southern Railway Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That under the Agreement, Coach Cleaner J-im~v Meadows, Atlanta,
Georgia was unjustly dismissed from service m July
18, 177,
2. That accord:i_ngly the Carrier be ordered to restore Coach Cleaner.
Janrny Meadows to service with all rights unimpaired including all
losses sustained account of :Loss of coverage under health,
welfare arid life insure.nce agreerients, and beginning July
18,
177,
he be compensated for all ta..Ye lost.
Findings:
The Second Division of the Adjustmen~c 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,
1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
The essential facts in this dispute are undisputed. Claimant was charged
with conduct unbecoming an employee for falsely apprising carrier's payroll
accounting department on July
7, 1977
in a sworn affadavit requesting a
replacement check that he never received check number
161080
amounting to
$371.09.
A preliminary investigation was meld on July
7, 1977
wherein it was
determined that he committed this offense and he was dismissed from service.
Shortly thereafter, pursuant to Agreement Rule
34,
claimant was provided
a formal investigation which confirmed the prior disposition.
In reviewing this case, we find the evidence of record of such competing
magnitude and weight, that we must unreservedly uphold carrier's dismissal
decision.
Form 1 Award No. 8037
Page 2 Docket No. 795
2-soU-CM-'
79
From the beginning of his calculated attempt to conceal the fact that
he endorsed and cashed the June,
1977
issued check, until he finally
admitted that he signed for and acknowledged before a notary public that he
had lied when
applying
for a replacement check, claimant's behavior was
characterized by a pattern of duplicity and mendacity that :is inexcusable.
His restitution of this money later on did not exonerate his actions.
The railroad industry is vested with a significant public interest that
cannot tolerate dishonesty or theft in any form Accordingly we cannot
find any plausible or mitigative basis upon which to grant sonne form of
leniency.
In Second Division Avr~ard 75185 this Board held in pertinent part that
"stealing or arty form of.' dishonesty on the railroad Zs a dismissal oi`fettse".
This decision~.l holding arjilies with equal force here. Thus we must reject
thi s cla:un.
A Trd A h D
Claire denied.
NATIONAL a,%11-.ROAD
ADr1USTn°,L1ul' BOARD
By Order oz" Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
--
~os arie Branch - Administrative Assistant
Dated a Chicago, Illinois, this 8th day of August,
1879.