i




                          Paul C. Carter, Referee


        (Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

                      (St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company


        STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:


        (1) The dismissal of Track Department Employe M. A. Young for alleged violation of Rule 189 was without just and sufficient cause and on the basis of unproven charges (System File B-1478).


        (2) Claimant M. A. Young shall be afforded the remedy prescribed in Article 11, Rule 91 (b) (6)."


        OPINICI OF BOARD: Claimant entered Carrier's service May 19, 1972. Be was

        removed from service August 23, 1978, for excessive

        absenteeism and for failure to secure authority to be absent on August 21

        and 22, 1978. Request was made by the Organization for formal investigation,

        which was conducted on September 8, 1978. A copy of the transcript of the

        investigation has been made a part of the record.


                Carrier's Rules 176 and 189 provide:


                  "Rule 176. Employes who are negligent or indifferent to duty ...will not be retained in the service." -


                  "Rule 189. Employes must not absent themselves from their duties, exchange duties with nor substitute others in their place, without proper authority."


        The record shows that during the first eight months of 1978, claimant was absent 47 working days and a portion of 16 other work days. The record also shows that claimant did not have proper permission to be absent on August 21 and 22, 1978.


        During the investigation, claimant's representative objected to claimant's prior record being included in the investigation. Although a few awards have held it to be improper to include an employs's past record in the transcript of the investigation, others have held to the contrary, where

              - C

              Award Number 23029 Page 2

              Docket Number hb1-2311x7


the past record was not used to determine guilt, but for the purpose of determining the discipline to be imposed for a proven offense. This Referee agrees with the latter group of Awards. See Awards 22460, 22521. The record shows that claimant had, on numerous prior occasions, been warned concerning his excessive absenteeism, but apparently to no avail.

 Based on the entire record, there is no proper basis for this Board to interfere with the action of the Carrier in imposing the discipline that it did.

        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 I~`-

the dispute involved herein; and

        That the Agreement was not violated.


                      A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: ~.·/~,
 Executive ecretasy

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of October 1980.