Foam 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMETIT BOARD Award No. 8061
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
8040
2-UP-CM-'79
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Rodney E. Dennis when award was rendered.
( System Federation No, 105, Railway Employes'
Department, A. F. of L. Co
if
00
Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)
( Union Pacific Railroad.
Company
Dispute: Claim of fm2loyes:
(1) That the Union Pacific Railroad has unjustly dealt with Cayman
Edward G. Nelson, Provo, Utah, when he was dismissed from service
on August
17, 1977
for allegedly violating Rule
702
of the Rules
and Instruction of the M, P. & M. Department.
(2) That accordingly the Union Pacific Railroad Carnpatxy be ordered to
reinstate Edward C, Nelson to his former position as stated in
Rule
37
of the Novenber 1,
1976
Agreement, with all Health and
Welfare Insurance Benefits, all credit under Railroad Retirement
and Unemployment Insurance Benefits, pay for all time lost at
the pro rata rate of pay of a Cayman during the period. of his
dismissal, and any other benefits he would have earned while
dismissed from service.
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 Tabor 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.
Claimant was discharged following a hearing held in connection with his
alleged unauthorized absence in violation of Rule
702
of Carrier's Rules
and Instructions of the Motive Power and Mechanical Department,
Our review of the hearing indicates that it was conducted fairly and
impartially and that Claimant was guilty of the offenses for which he was
charged. It is clear that he understood that he would not have authority
to be absent unless Carrier could obtain a vacation relief worker for him
to take vacation on these days, notwithstanding the fact that Carrier advised
him that it was unable to get such relief, Claimant took it upon himself to
b e absent on the days in question, our Board has consistently held that
Form 1 Award No.
8061
Page 2 Docket No. 80+0
2-UP-CM-
' 79
unauthorized absences, when proven, constitute a serious breaches of the
basic employer-employee relationship., which, if continued, should justify
discharge from service.
In Claimant's case, it is undisputed that his previous record with
Carrier included many previous unauthorized absences. It is also clear that
Carrier offered him an opportunity to return to service, on a leniency basis,
if he would report to his immediate supervisors and discuss with them his
poor record. Claimant failed to do so, thus passing up an early opportunity
to return to service. After thorough consideration of this dispute, it is
our judqnent that Claimant should be accorded another chance to return to
service, but without pay for time lost. In so doing, we admonish him that
his future career with the railroad depends upon his being a reliable worker
with a good attendance record_ Should he be found guilty of similar offenses
subsequently, Carrier would not be acting beyond its authority if it permanently
discharged hire. This Board may not look so kindly on arty other infractions.
We accordingly sustain the claim to the extent of reinstating Claimant to
service with seniority unimpaired, but without pay for time lost.
A W A R D
Claim sustained in accordance with the Findings.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTb2ENT
BOARD
By Order of Second
Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
~G-
By
0eemarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated t Chicago, Illinois, this 29th day of August, 1979.