Award No 9248
Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Docket No.943'7
SECOND DIVISION 2-ICG-S119-' 8.2
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee James F. Scearce when award was rendered.
( AFL-CIO Sheet Metal Workers' International Association
Parties to Dispute:
( Illinois Central Gulf Railroad Company

Dispute: Claim of Employes:









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 Ra31wa~ Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein .



Claimant was hired as a Sheet Metal Worker Apprentice in April of 196+. For the next six (6) years he worked in such capacity, except for military service leave and periods of furlough. On April 7, 1970, the Claimant was last furloughed as a Sheet Metal Worker Apprentice. Shortly thereafter, he was hired as a Machinist Apprentice and worked at that position for approximately one year; on April 30, 1971, he submitted his resignation as Machinist Apprentice for the stated purpose of accepting other employment outside the Carrier. The next contact with the Claimant came when he was rehired as a Sheet Metal Worker (Pipefitter) on February 20, 1979; his seniority was established as of that date. When the 1980 seniority rosters were published, issue was taken by the Claimant with his February 20, 1979 seniority date.

The Organization contends that the specific language and intent of the Claimant's letter in April of 1971 was to resign as Machinist Apprentice and not as Sheet Metal Worker Apprentice. Per the Organization, the Claimant should have continued to be carried as a Sheet Metal Worker Apprentice in a fu-lough status, subject to recall and that his seniority date, consequently, should reflect all
Form 1
Page 2

Award No. 9248

Docket No. 943?

2-ICG-SMW-182


service as a Sheet Metal Worker Apprentice. The Carrier contends that the Claimant terminated all service by his resignation in 1971 and was rehired in 1979. The Carrier also cites two time limit Rules, one involving seniority rosters (Rule 32) on which the Claimant should have been listed but which was devoid of his name for seven years without protest. The other time limit Rule (37 (a)j requires an employee to raise the issue within 60 days of the date of the occurrence of the disputed event -- a time period, per the Carrier, far exceeded by the Claimant's inaction.

We need look no further than the Claimant's resignation in assessing this case. While it is obviously in his own interests to conclude that his resignation was only from one craft, it was not within the Claimant's authority to limit such action unilaterally. It is well-established that as employee sacrifices all rights and benefits by the voluntary cessation of service. If the Claimant had some other intent in mind (e.g. to go back to furlough status as a Sheet Metal Worker Apprentice) he would have done well to have sought advice and/or approval from the Carrier before terminating employment. He did not and the result was an end to all rights and benefits, including seniority. His status in 1979 was that of a new hire.

AW A R D

Claim denied.

Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
National Railroad. Adjustment Board

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJLTSTNSOT BOARD
By Order of Second Division

.,-fk'se:narie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

Dated' at Chicago, Illinois, this 22nd day of July, 1982.