Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 9293
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
9179
2-ICG-MA-'82
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Josef P. Sirefman when award was rendered.
( International Association
or
Machinists and
Parties to Dispute: ( Aerospace Workers
(
( Illinois Central Gulf Railroad
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That the Illinois Central Gulf Railroad violated Rule
39
of the Schedule "A"
Agreement made between the Illinois Central Gulf Railroad and the
International Association of Machinists, AFL ® CIO, when they suspended
Machinist H. M. Thompson at
7:00
a.m., December 1,
1979,
and ending
7:00
a.m., January 15, 1930.
That accordingly, the Carrier be ordered to pay him all wages lost as a
result of the Carrier's violation of the controlling agreement, including
overtime losses.
3.
Make claimant whole for all holiday and vacation rights.
4. Pay premiums on Travelers Policy GA 23000, Illinois Central Gulf Hospital
Association, Provident Insurance Policy R®5000 and Aetna Dental Policy
GD-12000.
5. Make claimant whole for all losses and clear his service record of all
reference to the incident.
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,
193+.
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 H. M. Thompson, a machinist, lost his Mother-in-law, Aunt and Uncle
in a fire. He received three days bereavement leave at the end
of
October,
1979
at
which time his Mother-in-law was buried, returned to work on October 30th, and a
few days later went out of town for the burial of his other relatives. On November
7, 1979
Claimant received a notice of investigation "to anwer the charge that you
were absent, without permission, on November
3,
November 4 and November
5, 1979 in
violation
of
Rule 23 in the Schedule of Rules governing the working conditions of
Machinists and Rule
# 6
of
the General Superintendent's Regulations dated January
Form 1
Page 2
Award No. 9293
Docket No. 9179
2-ICG-MA-182
1, 1979·" These rules deal with absence from work for any cause without permission
and absenting oneself from duty without proper authority. The investigation was
held on November 16, 1979 and on November 27, 1979 Claimant was given a
45
day
calendar suspension commencing December 1, 1979.
A review of the record before the Board establishes that the November 7,
1979 notice of investigation provided sufficient particularity to permit Claimant
to properly prepare a defense for the allegations contained therein, and that the
Claimant was properly afforded all the procedures provided by the contract.
Although the record is clear that on October 22, 1979 Claimant received permission
from his Foreman to be absent October 27, 28 and 29, it is also clear that on
October 30th Claimant, now back at work, did not directly, on that day, request
further permission under Rule 23 from his Foreman for the additional days off
necessary to attend the out
of
town burials for his Aunt and Uncle. Thus, there
was substantial evidence in the record to support the Carrier's decision to
discipline Claimant.
However, the 45 calendar.day suspension was too severe under the circumstances.
Granted that Claimant's prior record contains a significant number of related
infractions. Nevertheless, the Carrier should have weighed Claimant's belief that
as a result of his conversation with the Foreman on October 22nd he felt that he
had permission to take the time off as needed to attend the respective burials to
be held at different places and on different days; although the Foreman was given
certainty only as to the three days at the end of October. Given the pressures of
the tragedy Claimant was apparently mistaken as to the extent of the permission
granted, but had made some attempt at prior notification. Accordingly the suspension
should be reduced to a twenty calendar day suspension and Claimant is entitled to
restoration of any wage loss and benefits for the remaining 25 calendar days in
accordance with the contract, except that Carrier is not required to pay premiums
for Health and Welfare under the Organization's Claim
A W A R D
Claim sustained. to the extent indicated in the Findings.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
By
o emarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 18th day of August, 1982e