"Own= Award No. 16341
Docket No. CL-17124
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Arthur W. Devine, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY, AIRLINE AND STEAMSHIP
CLERKS, FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND
STATION EMPLOYES
PACIFIC FRUIT EXPRESS COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the
Brotherhood (GL-6344) that:
(a) The Pacific Fruit Express Company violated the current
Agreement between the parties at Bakersfield, California, when on
September 24, 1966, it suspended employes J. H. Hernandez and
A. S. Vasquez from service for the period October 1, 1966 to March
31, 1967, pursuant to formal investigation at which the stated charges
were not proved; and,
(b) The Pacific Fruit Express Company shall now be required
to reimburse each of the above named claimants for all expenses
incurred during the suspension period which would otherwise have
been borne by the Company; to reimburse them for all travel expenses necessary in other employment during said period; and to
allow them all wage loss suffered during the period held out of
service.
OPINION OF BOARD:
The Claimants herein were involved in the
same occurrence that took place on August 13, 1966, at Carrier's Bakersfield
Ice Plant as in Award 16340, except in the present case, in citing the Claimants to appear at a formal investigation and hearing, the citation in each
instance read, in part:
"You are hereby notified to be present at the office of PFE Plant
Manager, Bakersfield, California, at 10:00 A. M., September 1, 1966
for formal investigation in connection with your alleged nonattendance to and non-performance of duty when you were observed
sleeping on the job at approximately 4:00 A. M., August 13, 1966
at the PFE Bakersfield Ice Plant, for which occurrence you are
hereby charged with responsibility which may involve violation of
PFE Company General Rule J, which reads as follows:
'We must devote ourselves exclusively to our duties during working hours; inattention to or non-performance of
duties cannot be permitted.' "
Following
the hearing that
was conducted on September 16, 1966,
the
Claimants herein were assessed discipline of suspension from
service of
Carrier until March 31, 1967.
In its submission to
the Board
the Petitioner alleges that "the stated
charges
were not
proved", which was also the only allegation made in the
handling of
the dispute
on the property. In its submission to the Board the
Petitioner
alleges, for
the first time, that Claimants' procedural rights were
violated in
the manner
in which the investigation was conducted and the appeal handled, but such contentions, not having been made in the handling
of the dispute on the property, cannot be considered by the Board.
A
review of
the transcript of the hearing shows that there was substantial probative evidence to
support the charges against the
Claimants.
The
fact that
the evidence against
the Claimants was furnished through the
testimony of a patrolman and a special agent does not detract from it.
We find no basis for disturbing the action of the Carrier, and will deny
the claim.
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the
whole record and all the
evidence, finds
and holds:
That
the parties
waived oral hearing;
That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are
respec
tively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,
as approved June 21, 1934;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved
herein; and
That the
Agreement was
not violated.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 24th day of May 1968.
Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, Ill. Printed in U.S.A.
16341 2