Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. ;067
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
9266
2-S PT-EW-' 82
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Edward M. Hogan when award was rendered.
( International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Parties to Dispute:
( Southern Pacific Transportation Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That under the current Agreement, Mechanical Department Electrician C. W.
Beard was unjustly treated when he was dismissed from service on November
2,
1979,
following investigation for alleged violation of portions of
Rules 802 and 810 of the General Rules and Regulations of the Southern
Pacific Transportation Company (Pacific Lines). Said alleged violation
occurring on September 11,
15, 16, 17, 18,
21, October
5,,6, 7, 8, 9,
20, 21, and 22,
1979.
2. That accordingly, the Southern Pacific Transportation Company (Pacific
Lines) be ordered to:
(a) Restore Electrician C.-W. Beard to service with all rights
unimpaired including service and seniority, loss of wages,
vacation, payment of hospital and medical insurance, group
disability insurance, railroad retirement contributions, and
loss of wages including interest at the rate of six percent
(6%)
per annum.
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.
Claimant was dismissed from service of the Carrier following a formal
investigation on the charges that Claimant was in violation of Rule 802 and Rule
810.Rules
802
and 810 state the following:
Rule 802: "Indifference to duty, or to the performance to duty
will not be condoned..."
Rule 810: "Employees
...
must not absent from their employment
without proper authority... Continued failure by employees to
protect their employment shall be sufficient cause for dismissal."
Form 1
Page
2
Award No. ?0
=7
Docket No.
9266
2-SPT-EW-'82
The record is replete with more than ample evidence of the Claimant's repeated
absenteeism during the three year's of his employment with the Carrier. Furthermore,
the record also shows that the Claimant had been warned on numerous occasions
prior to his dismissal, subjected to disciplinary proceedings which assessed
prior discipline for the same violations, and that the Claimant had generally
showed an indifference to his employment with the Carrier.
Furthermore, the Claimant was advised of his hearing through personal service
of the hearing notice to the Claimant by the Carrier's trainmaster. It is
uncontradicted through testimony at the hearing that the Claimant responded to
the trainmaster at the time of the personal service of notice that he was "on a
toot".
This Board finds ample evidence throughout the record to uphold the decision
of the Carrier. Unexcused absences over such a short period of time clearly
indicate a lack of concern on the part of the employee to his employment with
the Carrier.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
BY
osemerie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of April,
1982.