Form 1 NATIO1IAL RAILROAD ADJUST';:adT BOARD Award No. 8155
SECOND DIZTISICN Docket No. 7)?9
2-UP-YA-' '79
The Second Division consisted of the regular merbers and in
addition Referee George S . Roukis when award was rendered.

( International Association of T.tachinists and
( kerospane V'iorkex~s,
Parties to Disuute
(
( Union Pacific Railroad Company

Dispute: Claim of F3maloyes










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 employee involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the reanirg of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

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



. Claimant was charged with violating Rules "B" and "702" of Form 71,80, Rules and Instructions of the ?Motive Pvrer ad Machinery Department after he was found sleeping in a locomotive cab on April 17, 1977 at approximately 4:20 A.M.

An investigative hearing ;was held on 1aay 5, 1977, pursuant to Agreement Rule 37, at which time he was found guilty of the charges and dismissed frcm service effective, close of shift, ";'ay 19, 1977. This disposition is now before us.
Form 1 Award TSo. 8155
Page 2 Docket 1'o. 7979
2 UP-1rfA-' 79

In reviewing this case, the Board finds that the investigative transcri,'Pt solidly supports the charges. Claimant was discovered by two (2) supervisors in a reclining position and asleep in the Engineer's seat of locomotive Sr>401, contrary to Carrier's performance requirements. The infraction was confirmed by the local chairman's acknowledgement that claimant did not deny falling asleep.

Inasmuch as this Board has found sleeping on duty to be a dismissable offense, we find that claimant's past employment record and the apparent non volitional nature of his conduct warrants a penalty modi'-1_cation-

While we do not countenance this type of behavior and, in fact, consider it to be a serious dereliction of duty, we believe that claimant's satisfactory work record and the particular circumstances of his infraction justifies our determination.

His dismissal should serve as sufficient and commensurate punishment for this first time offense and thus reflect a more judicious application of progressive disciplinary principles.

We will restore him to service with all rights unimpaired, but without back pay and expect that he will diligently observe the r°o-ies v~,tnd regulations governing his employment.






                          By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

f% Rdsemarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

Dated /at Chicago, Zl-l.inois, this 31st day of October, 1979.