NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number W-22483
George S. Roukis, Referee
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Atlanta & Saint Andrews Bay Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood
that:
(1) The dismissal of Michael E. Frazier was without just and
sufficient cause and it was excessively disproportionate to the offense
with which charged (System File
1-19 (1) (77)/C
5.26A).
(2) Claimant Frazier shall be reinstated to service with
seniority unimpaired and with pay for all time lost."
OPINION OF HOARD: Claimant was charged with insubordination. An
investigation was held on November 22,
1977
wherein
he was found guilty of the specification and subsequently dismissed from
service, effective, December
19, 1977.
Accordingly, pursuant to our appellate responsibility wader
the Railway Labor Act, we examined the investigative transcript to
insure that appropriate due process standards were scrupulously
observed.
Since we have not found,after this careful review, any
procedural irregularites that might impair or call into question the
integrity of the administrative proceeding, we will proceed to assess
judicially the dispute's merits.
This Board has articulated over a long period of time
a
consistent body of decisional law methodically distinguishing and
defining the contours and acceptable bounds of progressive discipline.
We well nigh recognize the importance of employe rehabilitation in modern labor-management relations
our efforts to effectuating this policy objective.
But we have in the case before us, an employe, who in a short
period of time, has managed to compile a poor employment record.
Award Number 22372 Page 2
Docket Number Mw-22483
The Railroad industry is vested with a profound public
interest that transcends most employment relationships. The safe and
orderly operations of a rail transportation system, demands at an
irreducible minimum, desciplined and obedient employes. Claimant's
insubordinative manifestations fell short of this requirement and his
one (1) and one-half
Q)
year service record did not compensate for it.
Pertinent to our determination and controlling herewith is
Third Division Award 20263 (Referee Lieberman), where we held,
"Although we recognize that there are degrees of
insubordination and abuse, we do not concur in
Petitioner's argument. Taken alone we may well
have found that the penalty imposed was excessive
for the incident involved herein. However, it is
well established that carrier may properly consider
the employes service record as a whole in
determining the measure of discipline. Considering
the poor record of claimant in the less than four
years of service, we do not find any basis for the
contention that carrier's imposition of dismissal
was an abuse of managerial discretion."
We believe this principle is directly applicable to the fact
specifics herein,
We will thus deny the claim,
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole
record and all the evidence, finds an. holds:
That the parties waived oral hearing;
That the Carrier and the Enployes 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 the Agreement was not violated.
Award Number 22372 Page 3
Docket Number M4-22483
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD
~ BY Order of Third Division
ATTEST: ,y/~J/
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of March 1979.