Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 9911:
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 9508
2-SCL -FO-'84
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Edward M. Hogan when award was rendered.
(International Brotherhood
of Firemen and Oilers
Parties to Dispute:
(Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That under the current and controlling agreement, Laborer G. W. Hawkes
was unjustly dismissed from the service of the Seaboard Coast Line
Railroad Company on March 6, 1981, after a formal investigation was held
in the office of Mr. R. D. Brigman, Jr., Master Mechanic, on February
20, 1981.
2. That accordingly Laborer G. W. Hawkes be restored to his regular
assignment at Uceta Shops with all seniority rights unimpaired, vacation,
health and welfare, hospital and life insurance be paid and be compensated
for all lost time effective March 6, 1981, and the payment of 6%
interest rate added thereto.
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 employes 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.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
Claimant was dismissed from the service of the Carrier following a formal
investigation of the charges of not reporting for his assignment, being absent
without permission, and reporting late for work.
Claimant was assigned 7:30 a. m. to 3:30 p. m. Monday through Friday as a
laborer at the Uceta Enginehouse, Tampa, Florida. During a two-week period
spanning the
last week in January and the first week in February, 1981, the
Claimant did not attend work on a regular basis. This sporadic attendance was
coupled with a failure to call into his foreman, unexcused absences, and
reporting late to work.
As a consequence of Claimant's unpredictable attendance, an investigation
was scheduled. The Carrier properly notified the Claimant or the investigation
in a clear and concise letter, which provided Claimant adequate notice of the
charges preferred against him. The notice was sufficiently precise to permit the
preparation o f a reasonable defense by Claimant and his representative.
Form 1 Award No. 9911:
Page 2 Docket No. 9508
2-SCL-FO-184
The transcript of the investigation was carefully reviewed and it is noted
that the Claimant was afforded able representation by his organization. However, thi:
Board is unable to accept the Claimant's excuses and explanations for his erratic
attendance and unjustified absences. We have previously held that a pattern of
indifference and continuous absenteeism are sufficiently grounds to warrant discipline
or discharge.
In this case, the Claimant has acknowledged his own guilt through his
admissions during the investigation. Thus, on the record and in light of
Claimant's own admission, we must conclude that the Carrier sustained its burden o f
proof and that the Claimant was guilty. Claimant's prior record is properly
before this Board as Claimant had notice in the letter of charges that his
personnel record would be reviewed at the close of the investigation. Claimant's pri<
record was not good and indicates several disciplinary actions for similar
offenses.
This Board is limited to the record developed and presented on the property
and absent a showing o f arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable action, we must
sustain the Carrier's findings. Here, there is substantial evidence to support
Carrier's actions. We must deny the claim.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
ATTEST:
Nancy J. DevvExecutive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 16th day of May, 1984