NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 10748
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 10789
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Leonard K. Hall when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood Railway Carmen of the United States
( and Canada
Parties to Dispute:
(Washington Terminal Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That the Washington Terminal Company violated Rule 29 of the
controlling agreement when car cleaner Deborah T. Alexander was unjustly
suspended for five (5) days as a result of investigation held on October 31,
1983.
2. That accordingly the Washington Terminal Company be ordered to
reinstate Ms Alexander with compensation for her net wage loss, seniority and
vacation rights unimpaired, and made whole any loss due to health and welfare
benefits not continued.
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.
On September 21, 1983 the Claimant was employed as a Car Cleaner, had
finished cleaning a passenger coach and was found by a Supervisor sitting down
therein reading a newspaper, following which she was instructed to go to
another car that required immediate cleaning.
In a notice dated October 21, 1983, the Claimant was directed to
report for a hearing on October 31, 1983, on the following charge:
"Violation of Washington Terminal General Rule 'N',
Paragraph 4, which reads in pertinent part:
'. . .
Loitering in cars is prohibited, in that on September
21, 1983, about 11:30 a.m., a member of supervision
observed you loitering on Car 20013 of Train 184."
Form 1 Award No. 10748
Page 2 Docket No. 10789
2-WTC-CM-'86
At the hearing the Claimant testified that she had finished cleaning,
the car and had just picked up a newspaper found on the car and had been
sitting there five or ten minutes when the Supervisor appeared with instruc
tions to go to another car to clean it. She contended she was on her lunch
break and was waiting for the next train to arrive without going to the lunch
room at another level in the terminal. The Supervisor testified that she was
not eating, that he saw her later on the way to the lunchroom and also that it
was against regulations to eat on the cars.
It was not disputed that the Claimant testified that lunch breaks are
at random, depending on the jobs at hand and that it is customary for the Car
Cleaners to remain in the cars which they finish so the Supervisors can
readily locate them for their next assignments.
Nonetheless, it was the Supervisor's view that the Claimant was
loitering and he reported it accordingly.
The Board finds that suspension from service for a period of five
days without pay commencing January 11 through 15, 1983, was excessive. The
suspension is modified to a reprimand which will show on the Claimant's record
in lieu of the five day suspension.
The Terminal Company is required, therefore, to compensate the
Claimant for her net wage loss during the period involved and at the rate in
effect on those dates.
Rule 29 does not permit her being made whole for any loss due to
Health and Welfare benefits not continued. Seniority is unimpaired. Vacation
rights are governed by the Vacation Agreement.
A W A R D
Claim sustained in accordance with the Findings.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest:
ancy J.,B~r - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 19th day of February 1986.
low