Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
Award No. 13146
Docket No. 13005
97-2-95-2-33

The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Elizabeth C. Wesman when award was rendered.

(International Association of Machinists and ( Aerospace Workers PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Consolidated Rail Corporation

STATEMENT OF CLAIM:



FINDINGS:

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

The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employee 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.


Form 1 Award No. 13146
Page 2 Docket No. 13005
97-2-95-2-33

Until his dismissal Claimant was assigned as a Machinist 'n the Maintenance Department of Carrier's Enola Diesel Terminal. On March 11, 1994, Carrier informed Claimant that he was removed from service and confirmed that fact in a letter dated March 14, 1994. On March 16, 1994, Claimant was instructed to appear for a trial in connection with the following charges:





















At the outset, the Organization has raised procedural and due process objections to the investigation concerning the incident at issue. After a careful review of the record before the Board we do not find any basis of support for the Organization's contentions.
Form 1 Award No. 13146
Page 3 Docket No. 13005
97-2-95-2-33

With respect to the merits of this case, Claimant admitted helping Machinist Flail remove the drums of diesel fuel from Carrier's property, including providing Flail with a ride to his truck, which he left in the parking lot of a shopping center, after filling the drums with fuel. Claimant clearly showed callous disregard for Carrier's prohibition against theft by not reporting Flail's misconduct. However, there is no evidence on this record to suggest that Claimant anticipated or achieved any personal gain from the incident. Therefore, we do not find that Carrier has borne its burden of persuasion with respect to Charge No. 3. That charge, and all references to it shall be expunged from Claimant's personal record. However, the remaining charges are sufficiently serious to justify Carrier's dismissal of Claimant.




Claim denied, with the exception that Charge 3 shall be expunged from Claimant's file.




This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.



                        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 8th day of September 1997.