NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
John H. Dorsey, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD SIGNALMEN
THE TEXAS AND PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the
Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the Texas and Pacific Railway Com
pany:
(a) Carrier violated Rule 50(a) of the Signalmen's Agreement
when Signalman P. E. Hull was disciplined (dismissal) without an
investigation on October 22, 1968, resulting in actual loss of pay and
other benefits beginning November 11, 1968.
(b) Carrier now be required to clear Mr. Hull's personal record
of charges brought against him by Trainmaster J. R. Hinton's letter
of September 24, 1968, and reinstate him to his former position (or
to any position his seniority demands) with full pay for all time
lost on such positions, insurance coverage, and all other rights and
benefits provided for in Agreements between the partles, effective
November 11, 1968, and continuing until these requests are granted.
[Carrier's File: B 315-21]
OPINION OF BOARD:
The following notice, dated September 24, 1968,
addressed to Claimant and three other employes was personally served on
Claimant:
"Report to Welfare Building Diesel Facility Avondale La., 9:30
A. M. Monday, September 30, 1968 for formal investigation to develop
the facts and place responsibility, if any, in connection with signal
gang truck 7284 being loaded in excess of allowable width, and injurie [sic] to outside party while truck 7284 was moving west on
Hi-way 52 between Luling and Bootle about 5:20 P. M. September
23, 1968.
Bring representative which is permitted by applicable agreements and witnesses desired by you."
After a series of postponements, notice of which was served on or known
or should have been known to Claimant absent wilful evasion on his part,
hearing was held on October 16, 1968. The three other employes involved ap-
peared as did the General Chairman who fully participated in the proceedings.
Claimant failed to appear and as to him the hearing was conducted ex parte
without objection being voiced by the General Chairman. At the conclusion of
the hearing, in response to question asked by the Hearing Officer, the General
Chairman responded that the investigation had been held in a fair and impartial manner.
In its Rebuttal Statement (Submission) Petitioner states:
"In our ex parte submission we have not discussed the guilt or
innocence of the claimant under the charge by the Carrier; our position is that the Carrier's conduct was procedurally defective and that
such defect is fatal to its position:"
This confines the issue before us as to whether Claimant was afforded due
process. We find and hold in the affirmative. See our Award No. 13941. Compare, Second Division Awards No. 5987 and 5988.
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 respectively 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 Claimant was afforded due process.
AWARD
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of October 1970.
Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, 111. Printed in U.S.A.
18258 2