Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJIE TMENT BOARD Award No.
8794
SECOND DIVISION Docket
NO. 8668
2-SPT-EW-181
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee James F. Scearce when award was rendered.
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Parties to Dispute:
( Southern Pacific Transportation Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That the Southern Pacific Company (T&L), unjustly terminated the services
of Electrician Clyde Thomas on September
13, 1979.
2. That accordingly the Southern Pacific Company (T&L) be ordered to restore
Electrician Clyde Thomas with all seniority rights unimpaired, further that
he be compensated for eight
(8)
hours each day commencing with September
13,
1979,
continuous, plus holiday and overtime and all other fringe benefits
until such time as he returns to work.
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,
1931+.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispui:e waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
Claimant was suspendel and subsequently terminated on the basis of violate-on of
Rule 810; specifically he was charged with absenting himself from employment without
proper authority; his prior disciplinary record was considered in the assessment of
the extent of discipline in this instance. The record shows that he was absent: from
duty June
9,
10, 11, 23, 30;
July
6,
7,
8,
9,
11+; and August
2, 11, 16, 24.
and almost
7
hours of August
30,
1979.
According to the Claimant he was either sick, attending
to the needs of his ill wife or experiencing car trouble on one or more of such dates.
He submitted a doctor's statement for several such dates and had his sister attest to
one such absence in relation to his wife's problem. According to the Claimant;,
he reported in on all dates in question and properly received approval for such
absences. Testimony of one of his supervisors indicated he received no such call.
The Organization points to the Claimant's Time Card to substantiate its contention of
proper approval: on all dates of absence with the possible exception of one, entries
of word "sick" was made; certifying initials were also affixed. Essentially, the
Carrier asserts such circumstance does not indicate approval of such absences and
as a consequence the Claimant left his position unprotected.
Form 1
Page 2
Award No.
8794
Docket No.
8668
2-SPT-EW-'81
The Claimant's prior record of discipline evidences a continuing record of nonavailability from duty over an extended period of time and resultant discipline on
charges of violations of Rule 810: on December
30, 1977
he was officially warned
for changing a doctor's statement to support his absences from December 10 through
December 29,
1977;
on April 24,
1978
the Claimant was advised that his absence
since March
31, 1978
was without proper approval and a letter of May 12,
1978
formalized a warning in this regard; on June 12,
1978,
he was charged with absence
without permission since May
12, 1978;
on November
28, 1978
the Claimant was charged
with absences from his assignment since November 1,
1978;
on March
21, 1979
the Claimant
was suspended for
30
days due to
18
absences in February,
1979.
From such a
recitation of charges and discipline, it is obvious that the Claimant was well-aware
of his obligation under the applicable Rule.
We are satisfied that the Claimant's absences lacked proper authorization based
upon a reading of the record as a whole. The arguments relative to the time card
entries are not sufficiently persuasive to offset the otherwise clear indication that
this employee's prior record of non-attendance would require approval of absences
rather than a mere notation on the time card that the Claimant may have called in
and reported sick. Noting that the claimant had only built about three years service
and considering his prior record of absences during such period, we find no error
in the Carrier's assessment. of dismi::sal as the proper discipline as supported by
the record.
A W A R D
Claim is denied.
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
semarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated 7at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of October,
1981.