Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 95~4~0
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 9463
2-sPT-SM-'83
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee James F. Scearce when award was rendered.
( Sheet Metal Workers International Association
Parties to Dispute:
( Southern Pacific Transportation Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
(1) That Carrier arbitrarily and unjustly withheld claimant Sheet Metal
Worker M. M. Snow from service on July 23, 1980 in violation of Rules
25 and 39 of current Motive Power and Car Department Agreement between
Carrier and this Organization.
(2) That Carrier pay claimant 8 hours pay at pro-rata rate for time lost
due to arbitrary action of Carrier.
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
a as approved June_2 1, 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 employed at the Carrier's Diesel Locomotive Maintenance Shop
at Roseville, California, when on July 22, 1980 he was scheduled to work the
x+:00 p.m. - 12:00 midnight shift. Per the Claimant, he was physically unable to
meet his work obligations due to an earache; therefore, he called in to the
facility several hours before commencement of his shift and advised a clerk that
he would be unable to report for duty. He reported on the following day -June 23 -- and was turned iway on the basis that he had not afforded his foreman
notice as to his status at least eight hours in advance of such shift. In
essence, the Claimant's call to the clerk was not deemed by the Carrier as
sufficient notice under Rule 25(a):
"Absence From Work
Rule 25. (a) An employe detained from work account
sickness or for other cause, shall notify his foreman as
early as possible. When returning to work he shall give
the foreman in charge sufficient notice (at least 8 hours)
so that proper arrangements may be made."
Form 1
Page
2
Award No. 9540
Docket No.
9463
2-SPT-SM-'83
The Carrier also points to a notice posted on the bulletin board in 1978 which
it contends made clear what employes in this situation are to do:
"ALL EMPLOYEES
In order to avoid any misunderstanding or confusion, those
employees wishing to lay off should contact a supervisor or
a General Foreman to receive proper authority to be off.
When calling in to lay off, if the clerk should answer the
phone at either the Service Track or Diesel Ramp, please
ask to speak to either a supervisor or General Foreman."
The Organization does not dispute the fact that such notice was posted. The
Carrier contends that the Claimant had had in the past a number of similar, oneday absences where he apparently secured the proper authorization, thus indicating
he knew to contact his superior. The Organization contends the Claimant was
disciplined by the Carrier's refusal to let him go to work on July 23, 1980.
While the above-stated rationale leaves unanswered the question of how an
employe would meet his/her obligation should a supervisor not be available to
receive a call, there is no indication here that the Claimant followed the
procedure and asked for his foreman or some other supervisor. The 1978 notice is
specifically on point with the situation here. It is reasonable to conclude that,
absent a showing that the 1978 notice was successfully disputed by the Organization
and thus not the established procedure, the Claimant was obliged to comply. Weneed not address the question of whether the Claimant was -- or was not
replaced by another employe on July
23,
since a precedent conclusion that he was
in error in the manner he called in has been made, and Rule 25(a) is clear
enough on the need for at least eight hours notice prior to his return to duty.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
NATIONAL RAIIR.OAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
~semarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 6th day of July, 1983.