NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number CL-2278
Paul C. Carter, 'Referee
(Southern Railway Company
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and
( Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers,
( Express and Station Employes
r
OF ChAIM~ Carrier did not violate the agreement with the
Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship
s alleged, when it dismissed Mr. J. N. Webber, Operator at
ard, Knoxville, Tennessee, from the service of the Carrier
e an June 9, 1977.
Since the agreement was not violated, Mr. Webber is not
to be restored to the service of the Carrier and be com. for all time lost including overtime
1977 and continuing, as claimed for and in behalf of Mr.
iy the Clerks' Organization.
OF BOARD; This dispute, submitted to the Board by the
Carrier, involves the dismissal of J. N. Webber,
:, regularly assigned to the operator's position at Carrier's
!ard, Knoxville, Tennessee, hours 3:00 p.m. to 11:00 P.M.
On June 9, 1977, Carrier's Assistant Superintendent wrote
per and dismissed him from the service of the Carrier for
lination for his failure to comply with the instructions
)ivision officer at approximately 3120 p.m., June 8, 1977,
to the Call Office the call for train No. 126 to Oakdale
p. m. Mr. Webber requested a hearing in accordance with the
ins of the collective bargaining Agreement. The hearing was
d for July 5, 1977, and later rescheduled for July 11, 1977.
)f the transcript of the hearing has been made a. part. of the
Mr. Webber was present throughout the hearing, was
Lted by the Local Chairman of the Organization, and
:d witnesses in his behalf.
A review of the transcript of the hearing shows that none
rants substantive procedural rights was violated. The
Award Number 22742 Page 2
hearing was thorough and was conducted in a fair and impartial manner.
Following the hearing, the Superintendent wrote Mr. Welber on July 22,
1977, and affirmed his dismissal. The Organization, on July 29, 1977,
initiated a claim in behalf of Mr. Webber for pay for all time lost,
including overtime and holidays, until restored to service. The claim
in behalf of Mr. Webber was handled in the usual manner on the property,
declined at each level of appeal, and is properly before the Board
for adjudication.
There was substantial evidence presented at the investigation to support the Carrier's action. C
of insubordination in refusing to comply with instructions of the
Terminal Trainmaster to relay to the Call Office the call for train
No. 126 to Oakdale for 5:30 p.m. on June 8, 1977. The contention
that Mr. Webber was busy with train orders at the time of his
refusal to comply with the instructions of the Trainmaster is not
persuasive. The record establishes that the Trainmaster did not
issue the instructions to Mr. Webber while the latter was preparing
train orders, but waited until Mr. Webber was finished with the
train orders and called him back to issue the instructions which
Mr. Webber refused to carry out. The record also establishes that
it was an established procedure for the Terminal Trainmaster to
instruct the operator to relay to the Call Office calls for trains.
It is well settled in the railroad industry that employes
must comply with instructions from their superior officers and then
complain later if they think that they have been mistreated, except
where a real safety hazard may be involved. There is no safety
hazard involved in our present dispute. Whether Mr. Webber believed
that the work involved could properly be assigned to him is not
controlling. It was his duty to comply with the instructions and
thereafter seek a remedy through proper grievance channels for
whatever rights he felt were violated.
The Board's attention has also been called to Mr. Webber's
past record over the three and one-half year period prior to the
incident involved herein, which record was far from satisfactory.
There is no proper basis for the Board to interfere with
the action of the Carrier. The claim of the Carrier will be
sustained.
Award Number 22742 Page 3
Docket Number CL-22786
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving
the parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon,
and 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 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.
A W A R D
The dismissal of Mr. J. N. Webber upheld.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:__,P
'I '
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 29th day of February 1980.