Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 9185
 SECQND DIVISION Docket No. 8814
 2-BN-FO-182
 The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee David H. Brown when award was rendered.
 ( International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers
 Parties to Dispute:
 ( Burlington Northern Railroad Company

 Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That in violation of the current Agreement, Laborer John Alvarez, Denver,
 Colorado, was unfairly dismissed from service of the Burlington Northern,
 Inc. effective April 20, 1979.
 2. That accordingly, the Carrier be ordered to make John Alvarez whole by
 restoring him to service with seniority rights, vacation rights, and all
 other benefits that are a condition. of employment, unimpaired, with
 compensation for all lost time plus 6% annual interest; with reimbursement
 of all losses sustained account loss of coverage under Health and Welfare
 and Life Insurance Agreements during the time held out of service; and the
 mark removed from his record.
 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 axed 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.

Claimant Alvarez was employed as a laborer at Carrier's 23rd Street Roundhouse Repair Track, Denver, Colorado, with working hours of 7:30 A.M. to 3:30 P.M. On March 12, 1979, after reporting for work, he was assigned to move tie plates from one end of a car to the other end. While doing so, Claimant suffered a back injury and filled out a personal injury report indicating "strained back while moving tie plates". He then left Carrier's property without previously informing his supervisor or securing permission to do so.

 Although scheduled to work the following day, March 13, Claimant did not report at the designated starting time and location of his assignment. He continued to be absent through March 19, 1979, when he was cited to attend an investigation "for the purpose of ascertaining the facts and determining your responsibility in connection with your allegedly being absent without proper authority from March 12, 1979 to this date as a laborer at the 23rd Street Denver Repair Track".

 The investigation was held as scheduled, and while Local Chairman P. H. Mayhew appeared on behalf of Claimant, Mr. Alvarez did not appear. The following testimony was adduced:
 Form 1 Award No. 9185
 page 2 Docket No. 8814
 2-EN-FO-182
 "Q, I also hand you a copy of his employee registration form
 which is signed by John Alvarez on 8/23/74, and a copy of
 his W-4 form, same date. Would you please read the addresses
 on those two forms?
 A. 4791 High, Denver, C0, 80216. Same address on W-2.
 Q. For the record, would you please read the return for certified
 mail address to Mr. John Alvarez, the address along with the
 address on the copy of the letter sent by certified mail,
 363390 mail and also a copy of the return receipt and insured
 certified mail. Are those the same address?
 A. 4791 High, Denver, C0, 80216, the same address on all of them.



We first address the Organization's claim that Carrier failed to comply with Rule 28(c) of the Agreement, which the Organization quotes with emphasis supplied:

It is the Organization's position that the burden is on Carrier to obtain actual service of the notice on the employe. No award is cited in support of this position and indeed we believe there is none. Carrier notified Claimant by registered mail addressed to the last address furnished to Carrier by Claimant. This is sufficient unless there is a positive showing that nondelivery of the notice was not the fault of the employe. No such proof is in the record. We cannot accept unsupported assertions that Claimant was undergoing medical treatment.

 The record fully supports Carrier's finding that Claimant violated Rule 665. He walked off the job without permission. He sought no medical leave. He did not try to mark off for any purpose. Yet he did not protect his job. All of this proof was properly made at the investigation and Claimant was accorded due process in every respect. Termination was warranted under the prevailing circumstances.






Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
        National Railroad Adjustment Board -


By ~.. L-~(
 semarie Brasch - Administrative Assis nt
 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 22nd day of July, 1982.