Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMNT BOARD Award No. 87'70
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 8622
2-CR-EW-181
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Rodney E. Dennis when award was rendered.
( International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Parties to Dispute:
( Consolidated Rail Corporation
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That under the controlling agreement Electrician G. E. Houk was discriminated
against and unjustly suspended and dismissed from service of the Consolidated
Rail Corporation on October
3
and November 30, 1978 respectively.
2. That accordingly, the Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail) be ordered to
restore Electrician G. E. Houk to service with all seniority rights
unimpaired, vacation rights and all other benefits that are a condition of
employment, unimpaired and compensated for all lost time during the 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 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.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
Electrician Gerald E. Houk, claimant, was employed at the Selkirk, N.Y., Diesel
Terminal. On October 3,
19'78,
he was charged with the forgery and misuse of meal
tickets and held out of service pending a trial. The trial took place on November
17, 1978, and claimant was dismissed from service on November 30, 1978. A review of
the stenographic record of that trial reveals that claimant was afforded all substantive
and procedural rights and that he was given a full and fair hearing.
The record clearly indicates that claimant, by his own admission, was guilty of
both theft and forgery. These actions by themselves are grounds for discipline,
up
to and including dismissal from service. In light of claimant's past work record,
which includes theft and reinstatement on a leniency basis, the penalty in the instant
case is appropriate.
The organization's reference to the leniency afforded others involved in the
same crime has no bearing on this case. This Board finds nothing arbitrary, capricious
or discriminatory in the penalty meted out to claimant, since it is well understood
in this industry that theft from carrier is grounds for discharge.
F orm 1
Page 2
A W A R D
Claim denied.
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
By
Award No. 8770
Docket No.
8622
2-CR-EW-'81
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
o marie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of September,
1981.