Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 11010
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 11060
2-MP-MA-'86
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee W. J. Peck when award was rendered.
(International Association of Machinists and
( and Aerospace Workers
Parties to Dispute:
(Missouri Pacific Railroad Company

Dispute: Claim of Employes:

1. Continuing claim in behalf of Machinist Apprentice B. E. Norwood commencing April 23, 1984 for eight (8) hours at the pro rata rate for each day lost as a result of the Carrier's unjust dismissal of Mr. Norwood, in violation of the controlling Agreement, as amended, and in particular, Rule 32. For all overtime for which he would have been available at the punitive rate and all holidays until he is reinstated to service.

2. Credit for vacation and qualification during the interim period, compensation for medical and dental expenses he incurs that would have been covered under the Agreement.

3. Compensation equal to wages and benefits lost as the result of the loss of seniority due to the Carrier's unfair dismissal of Apprentice Norwood which will continue to damage Mr. Norwood for his remaining career.

4. Reimburse the Railroad Retirement Board compensation paid as unemployment benefits to Mr. Norwood as a result of his dismissal as damages.

5. Four hours pay at the pro rata rate for being required to attend the investigation April 17, 1984.

6. The removal of all material pertaining to this incident from his personal record file.



FINDINGS:

The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:


Form 1 Award No. 11010
Page 2 Docket No. 11060
2-MP-MA-'86

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.



The Claimant in this case is a Machinist Apprentice who was first employed as a Laborer on date of August 17, 1977. He became a Machinist Apprentice on December 11, 1979, and was upgraded to the position of Machinist on March 10, 1982. His place of employment is Carrier's Little Rock Terminal at Little Rock, Arkansas. On date of April 8, 1984, Carrier sent the following Notice to him:



The Investigation was held as scheduled and on April 23, 1984, Carrier advised Claimant by letter that:



The Claimant freely admitted being either absent or late on the days in question. His past record was also introduced and said record is truly deplorable. While an Employe cannot be disciplined over his past record, this Board has nonetheless ruled countless times that an Employe's past record can be considered in determining the degree of discipline. Considering and giving careful thought to all of the facts brought out in this case we do not feel justified in substituting our judgment for that of the Carrier, and we will deny the case.


Form 1 Award No. 11010
Page 3 Docket No. 11060
2-MP-MA-'86




                              By Order of Second Division


Attest: /'
Nancy J., r - Executive Secretary

Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 1st day of October 1986.