BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY, AIRLINE AND STEAMSHIP
CLERKS, FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND
STATION EMPLOYES
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood (GL-6661) that:
OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant entered Carrier's service as a Trucker on February 7, 1947. On July 12, 1968, he was assigned as a Station Baggageman at Pennsylvania Station, New York, New York.
On July 12, 1968, Claimant was assigned to work, and was working, at the Kansas City Chute nn the diagonal platform. Claimant informed his foreman, Tom J. Howard, that dust from "soapstone", present at the location, was aggravating a skin disorder with which he was afflicted. The Foreman, forthwith, assigned him to work on the "walkic"-a wheeled vehicle controlled from a handle which is used to guide it. Assistant General Foreman Richardson, upon hearing of this assignment, countermanded the Foreman's directed assignment of Claimant and told Claimant to work the Chute. Claimant at 5:20 P.M. allegedly left his job location on the platform to seek out and appeal to the Assistant General Foreman's immediate supervisorthis after being told by the Assistant General Foreman that if he could not work the chute he would have to be checked out and go home. Unable to find the Assistant General Foreman's supervisor, Claimant returned to the chute, but on advice of a "Mr. N:ulvey", he complied with the Assistant General Foreman's instructions by electing to go home rather than work the chute. The vague record before us indicates that Claimant was checked out by the Assistant General Foreman at 6:05 P. M. and was not paid for the subsequent time of his work day.
Under date of July 1::, 1968, Carrier served Claimant with the following charge:
Hearing was held on August 9, 1968. During the hearing Carrier struck allegation 3 of the charge.
During the hearing Claimant admitted allegation 1 of the charge. Therefore, only allegation 2 wma at issue. The burden of proof-this being a disciplinary case-was vested in Carrier.
By Notice of Disciphie dated August 16, 1968, Carrier found Claimant guilty as charged in allegations 1 and 2; and, imposed discipline of three (3) days' suspension. All appeals on the property were in turn denied.
The record shows that the only instruction to Claimant gave him an election: (1) to return to the Chute; or (2) be checked out and go homeClaimant chose the latter. This we find was not insubordination, as argued by Carrier in its Submission. Carrier having failed to satisfy its burden of proof, we are compelled to sustain the claim.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Emplo;Ves 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 Carrier failed to prove the charges against Claimant by substantial material and relevant evidence of probative value.