Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 11294
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 11313
2-NRPC-EW-'87
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Paul C. Carter when award was rendered.
(International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Parties to Dispute:
(National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
Appeal of dismissal from service of Electrician Tyrone Rogers
effective January 2, 1986.
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 were given due notice of hearing thereon.
The record shows that Claimant entered Carrier's service on February
14, 1977. At the time of the occurrence giving rise to the dispute herein he
was employed as an Electrician at Carrier's 16th Street Diesel Facility,
Chicago, Illinois.
On December 6, 1985, Claimant was notified to attend a formal
Investigation on December 12, 1985, in connection with the charge:
"Your responsibility for your alleged failure to
comply with that portion of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation Rule of Conduct 'F'
which states: 'All employees are required to
conduct themselves in a courteous and professional manner in dealing with the public and
other Amtrak employees. Boisterous conduct or
horseplay and profane or vulgar language are
prohibited. Employees will not assault,
threaten, harass, intimidate, fight, or participate in any activity which could cause bodily
injury to other employees or members of the
public while on duty or on Amtrak property or
using Amtrak equipment. Employees, whether
Form 1
Page 2
on or off duty, will not disrupt or interfere
with other employees in the performance of
their duties'; and 'G' which states: 'Employees
subject to duty, reporting for duty, or while
on duty, are prohibited from possessing, using
or being under the influence of alcoholic beverages, intoxicants, narcotics or other mood
changing substances, including medication whose
use may cause drowsiness or impair the employee's responsiveness.'
In that, at approximately 2:00 p.m. on December
4, 1985, you allegedly conducted yourself in a
threatening and intimidating manner. You were
disruptive and interfered with the duties of
Foreman A. Shephard and General Foreman E.
Loumakis. Also you were alleged to be under the
influence of an alcoholic beverage."
Award No. 11294
Docket No. 11313
2-NRPC-EW-'87
At the request of the Organization, the Investigation was postponed
and rescheduled for December 18, 1985, at which time it was conducted. A copy
of the transcript of the lengthy Investigation (254 pages) has been made a
part of the record. Claimant was present throughout the Investigation, with
two duly accredited representatives. Numerous objections were raised by
Claimant's representatives during the course of the Investigation. We have
considered the objections raised and find none of them or all of them of
sufficient significance to invalidate the proceedings. The charge against the
Claimant was sufficiently precise to enable the Claimant and his representatives to prepare a defense. Claimant was not denied any Agreement rights.
We will not attempt to analyze here all the evidence adduced in the
lengthy formal Investigation. We do find, however, that substantial evidence
was introduced in support of the serious charges against the Claimant. The
defense of diabetes on the part of Claimant is not persuasive and must fail.
The record shows that Claimant was previously dismissed from
Carrier's service on similar charges, effective September 10, 1982. That
dismissal was appealed in the usual manner up to and including this Board.
In Second Division Award No. 10211, issued on January 16, 1985, the Board
concluded that the discipline had served its purpose, and awarded that
Claimant be restored to service with seniority unimpaired, but without backpay.
Considering the seriousness of the charge against the Claimant
herein, the substantial evidence in support of the charge, and Claimant's
prior record, we find no proper basis to interfere with the discipline imposed
by the Carrier.
Form 1 Award No. 11294
Page 3 Docket No. 11313
2-NRPC-EW-'87
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest:
Nancy J. v - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 1st day of July 1987.