Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 8301
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 81+9
2-CR-CM-180
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee George S. Roukis when award was rendered,
( System Federation No, 1, Railway Employee'
( Department, A, F. of L. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute:
( (Carmen)
Consolidated Rail Corporation
Dispute: Claire of Employee:
(a) That the Carrier violated the controlling agreement when on July 7,
1977, Coach Cleaner G. Bush was removed from service pending hearings
held and finally completed on August 12, 1977, and finally dismissed
from the service of the Carrier on August 22, 1977.
(b) That accordingly, the Carrier be ordered to reinstate Claimant to
service with seniority rights, vacation rights, and all other rights
that are a condition of employment unimpaired, with compensation for
all lost time, plus
6%
annual interest, as of July
7,
1977 up to and
including date this case is finally resolved; and reimbursement for
all losses sustained account loss of health, welfare and life insurance
covered by the Agreement during time held out of 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 employee 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 jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
An investigation was held on J'u1.y 18 and August 21, 1977 pursuant to
Agreement Rule
34
to determine Claimant's responsibility in connection with
charges regarding his unauthorized and improper use of a Company Gasoline Credit
Card on various dates between February 2, 1977 and April 14, 1977 and his
unauthorized possession of a Company Credit Card during this time. He was
subsequently found guilty of these specifications and dismissed from service,
effective August 22, 1977. This disposition is now before this Division,
In reviewing this case, we do not find merit to Claimant's contention that
he was improperly suspended prior to the investigative hearing or denied due
process protection. He was provided a fair and impartial hearing that comported
with the judicial requirements of Rule
34
and his pre-investigation
suspension
was consistent with this Rule. He was charged with serious offenses that, under
the circumstance of their occurrence warranted his prompt
suspension.
Form 1
Page 2
Award No.
8341
Docket No. 81+9
2-CR-CM-'
80
On the other hand, we concur with Carrier that his raising for the first
time at the Board level, the assertion that Carrier never charged him with any
specific operating, safety or controlling Agreement rule violation is contrary
to the clear requirements of Circular No. 1 and thus we must declare this new
argL=ent as inadmissable. He was under an obligation to pursue this line of
reasoning on the property.
Similarly, we do not find any merit or validity to his substantive defenses.
The record four squarely shows that he admitted being in possession of the Company
Gasoline Credit Card and the signature comparisons demonstrate that he signed the
charged slips. The Carrier's Auditor testified that a service station proprietor
identified the Claimant as being the person who used the credit card and the
verification of the charge slips to his vehicle's license number confirms this
usage. Claimant wilfully engaged in a systematic pattern of illegal activities
that, if individually perpetrated, would amount to a dismissal offense. We
find no reason to disturb Carrier's penalty.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
By
o ema,ri a Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated t Chicago, ZZl.inois, this 2nd day of April,
1980.