Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 8491
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 8236
2-A&S-MA-'80
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee David H. Brown when award was rendered.
( International Association of Machinists and
( Aerospace Workers
Parties to Dispute:




Dispute: Claim of Employes:







Findings:

The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and a17. 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.



At all pertinent times Gary M. Stephens was regularly employed as a machinist at Carrier's locomotive shop in East St. Louis, Illinois, with regularly assigned work week Monday through Friday 11:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M., third shift, rest days Saturday and Sunday.

At about 10:30 P.M. on October 27, 1977, Claimant telephoned Combination Foreman Dennis gorando and advised him that he would be about an hour late, requesting Korando to see if he could get the machinist on duty to cover for him. Korando "told him that there would be no problem, it would be okay". Claimant requested the delay in reporting because his mother had started to have chest pains. Claimant was the only one living with his mother and was concerned
Form l Award No. 8491
Page 2 Docket No. 8236
2-MP-MA-'80

about leaving her until other arrangements could be made or her condition stabilized. Instead, her condition worsened until it was decided she should be hospitalized. This decision was made between 11:00 and 11:15 P.M., and Claimant then had his mother admitted to the hospital. At 12:20 A.M. Claimant made the first of four telephone calls to notify Car Foreman Jack Nooney that he would be unable to protect his assignment. The telephone at the shop was not answered until 6:30 A.M., at which time he advised Mr. Nooney of the reason for his absence. Claimant had remained at the hospital with his mother, feeling that her condition demanded his presence.

Formal investigation was held on November 4, 1977, "to develop the facts and place (Claimant's) responsibility, if any, in connection with ... failure to protect your assignment at 11:00 P.M., October 27, 1977." As a result of such investigation Claimant received 30 days actual suspension for failure to protect his assignment as charged.

We have carefully reviewed the transcript of such investigation and the entire record and must conclude that while Claimant did fail to protect his assignment, the circumstances were totally exonerative. His absence from work was justified; his efforts to contact Carrier, under the circumstances, were sufficient.






                            By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
        National Railroad Adjustment Board


By v
semarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

      Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 5th day of November, 1980.