Form 1
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 8568
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 8568
 2-BNI-FO-'81

 The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee John B. LaRocco when award was rendered.


Parties to Dispute:



Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. Under the current controlling Agreement, Mr. L. C. Wiggins, laborer,


2. That, accordingly, the Burlington Northern, Inc. be ordered to reinstate






Findings:
The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and ail 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.

C1,417ant, a roundhouse laborer, was dismissed from service after a hearing held on December 4, 1970. By proper notice dated November 28, 1978, clam,:ant ~.; :s charged with continued absence without proper authority for the period from November

 7, 1:7`~ to _soY er.~.ber %?0 , 1q7u. C 1. investigsLion.

 The crz aniz anon urses us to rep. :,t~.t~ the. c? . :..- ._ .. ..:_t'? f..?1 b_.,... r. all benefits i~1iz::-aaired because the claimant was allegedly absent with a valid medical excuse. The carrier, asserting that it in,-nosed discipline in a reasonable
 fashion, nr.Xes t!i~t t1-~ roe .--' _. . . ~t-.-~i.~1 evidence showing the clair_ant
 Form 1 Award No. 8568
 Page 2 Docket No. 8568
 2-BNI-FO-'8 1
 Rule 665 states:
 "Employees must report for duty at the designated
 time and place. They must be alert, attentive and
 devote themselves exclusively to the Company's
 service while on duty. They must not absent them-



The evidence clearly demonstrates that the claimant was absent during the three week period from November 7, 1978 to November 28, 1978 and that he failed to report his absences to the designated foreman. The only evidence proffered at the investigation concerning a possible medical excuse indicated not that the claimant was unable to work but rather that the claimant had actually been given a medical release to return to work as of November 7, 1,78. The record is incomplete in this regard solely due to the claimant's inexplicable and unjustifiable failure to appear at his own investigation. The carrier lm.d previously warmed the claimant that his continued absence without proper permission could result in the imposition of discipline including discharge. When an employee is expressly warned to improve his attendance record, he must do so or face the consequences. Second Division. Award r;o. 77060 (~,Teiss).

 Looking at the record as whole, claimant has shown that he is an undependable employe who has acted in total disregard of the carrier's need to maintain rorn_aI railroad operations. Excessive failure to report for duty forces the carrier to t,:i:` extraordinary measures to alleviate the disruption caused by the absences. Second Division Award No. 7603 (Weiss). Even if the claiinant had ^, valid medical excuse, he was still under an obligation to timely report his problem to the carrier. Second Division Award No. 5115 (N,srx). 1~ider the circumstances, a three wee,: abs`nce %.:it':cut tendering a proper medical excuse is a serious offense. Thus, we will not disturb the carrier's judrg:ment that dismissal was warranted.
 There. are no mitigating considerations to support a redL,,ct-_o:z in ti:e i enalty.




                            By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secret-ary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 By l ._."r__ _ _'__
 y

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 7th day of January, 1981.