Form 1 NATMNAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 8828
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 8778
2-B8o0CT-CM-' 81

The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Paul C. Carter when award was rendered.


Parties to Dispute: ~ and Canada

Dispute: Claim of Employes:

Baltimore and Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad Company





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 aver the dispute involved herein.



The claimant was employed at Carrier's Chicago, Illinois, Railway Terminal. He had been in Carrier's service in excess of 28 years. On April 15, 1979, he was given an investigation on charge of excessive absenteeism from his assignment on the following dates:

October 30, 1978 - no report November 6, 1878 - absent

November 7, 1978 - no report November 8, 1978 - no report November 20,1878 - no report December 8, 1878 - no report January 2, 1878 - no report February 12,1879 - no report February 13,1g'j`9 - no report February 26,1879 - no report


February 27, 1979 - no report February 28, 1979 - no report

March 1, 1979 - absent
March 2, 1979 - absent
March 26, 1979 - no report
March 27, 1878 - no report
March 28, 1879 - no report
March 29, 1878 - absent
Form 1 Page 2

Award No. 8829

Docket No. 8779

2-B&OCT-CM-'81

In other words, during the period October 30, 1978 through March 29, 1979, he was absent 18 days.

Invie.~tigation was conducted on April 5, 1979, and a copy of the transcript has been made a part of the record. We have carefully reviewed the transcript and find that none of claimant's substantive procedural rights was violated. The investigation was conducted in a fair and impartial manner.

From our review of the record, we are of the opinion that some of claimant's absences were justified, such as the wedding of his daughter and the visit of his son military service, but he should have contacted his superiors.

The Board .finds that discipline was warranted, but considering his 28 years of service, thirty days actual suspension was excessive. We will award that the discipline be reduced to twenty days actual suspension and that claimant be paid for time lost beyond the twenty days actual suspension, pay to be computed in accordance with Rule 37(a). Claimant should understand, however, that it is his obligation to take care of his job, and that his work attendance record must improve.

A W A R D

Claim sustained to the extent indicated in Findings.

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board



Dated Chicago, Illinois, this 2nd day of December, 1981.