Form I NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 9497
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 9665
2-SPT-FO-183
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Francis M. Mulligan when award was rendered.
( International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers
Parties to Dispute:
( Southern Pacific Transportation 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 Railway Labor Act: as approved June 21, 1934.

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



D. H. Richardson, the Claimant, entered Carrier's service on May 3, 1977 as a laborer at Carrier's Los Angeles Locomotive Maintenance Plant. He continued employment until April 15, 1978. On April 15, 1978, Claimant claims that he sustained an injury while on duty. Subsequent thereto, he was released by his treating physician to return to duty on February 7, 1979 with minor restrictions on his activities. Claimant was sent notice on September 10, 1980 terminating his service for absenting himself from his employment without authority in violation of Carrier Rule 810 and in accordance with Rule 33 (b) of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. There is no evidence in the record that Claimant attempted to contact the Carrier at anytime after February 7, 1979 up to and through the time he was discharged on September 10, 1980. Claimant appeals on the ground that he was not afforded a just and impartial hearing. Carrier's position is based on Rule 810 of the General Rules and Regulations which reads in pertinent parts, as follows:


Form 1 Page 2

Award No. 9497
Docket No. 9665
2-SPT-FO-'83

Carrier also bases its decision on Rule 33(b) of the Collective Bargaining Agreement which reads in pertinent parts, as follows:

"... Employees who are absent from duty without authority in excess of ten (10) days, without good and sufficient reason which must be furnished within fifteen (15) days of the date such absence begins in which event their employe relationship may be terminated without a hearing."

In this instance, the Collective Bargaining Agreement does not require a hearing. Claimant never contacted the Carrier from the date he was discharged from his treating physician until the date he received the notice of termination. Many multiples of ten (10) days occurred within that time frame. Carrier claims that it attempted to contact Claimant, but these efforts were to no avail. The letter of termination was actually unclaimed by the Claimant. It was finally returned to the Carrier on October 29, 1980.

Even if Mr. Richardson was still suffering effects of his injury, he should have protected himself by extending his medical leave by revisiting his physician and having his physician communicate with the company physician or at least do something to show that he was still medically distressed: Nothing in the-record indicates that this was the case.

A W A R D

Claim denied.

Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

By Order of Second Division


ByL~


Dated 7at Chicago, Illinois, this 25th day of May, 1983.