NATIONAL
anI.xoAD
AnnSMM BOW
THIM DIVISION Docket Number NB-23b29
(E. W. Jefferson
PARTIES TO DISPVfSs
(Southern Railway Company
3TAMRMR' (F Q.Albia "Carrier violated the Agreement at Chesblse, Georgia.,
rhea an August 1,
1978
it unjustly dismissed m
(S. W. Jefferson) Iran the service fate an alleged failure to protect
my
assignment.
For this violation, the Carrier shall be required to restore
me to service with all rights unimpaired and compensate m for all loss
of vagee, comeacing August
18, 1978,
and _rontinning until each restora·
tics is aecaepliahsd."
OPINIOA OF BOARD: The Claimant., Mr. &. W. Jefferson, Sr., employed as a
Claim Clark by the Carrier, vas incarcerated on June 13,
1978,
for failure to comply with an order of the Superior Court a? Ovinaett
Oounty, State of Georgia, to pay his ex-wife the am of
$1,968.00
on or before Jane 1,
1978.
On June
15, 1978,
the Carrier suspended Claimant for
15
days for failure to protect his assignment caaneiseing at
7:30 AM June 14P
1978.
Claimant failed to report to work. at the expiretioa of the ly day
suspension and the Carrier an June 30,
1978,
issued a second suspension
of 30 days far failure to protect his assignment on June 30th.
The second. suspension letter specifically provided that Claisnat would be
considered as having abandoned his position and would be dismissed five
service it he failed to report at the end of that suspension* Claimant
flailed to report to nark an July 31, 19'r8, the cad of the second suspension.
On August 1,
1978,
Chrrier by letter formally
dismissed Claimant
free service.
Claimant vas subsequently released iron fail an August
6, 1978,
sad he requested an Investigation into the propriety of his
dismissal
from
aerrica, which vas held on August 17s,
1978.
Dopy of the transcript of the
investigation was made a part o! the record. A careful c~minatioa of the
transcript indicates Claimsat was given a fair and impartial hearing an re-
required by the rules of the Agreement* Os August
25, 1978,
Carrier confirmed
by letter its previous decision dismissing Claimant free carries.
Award Number 23538 Page 2
Docket Number ms-23429
Claimant contended that it was through no fault of his that he was
unable to protect his assignment, and, therefore, the penalty of dismissal was
harsh and unfair to him. The record shorts the Carrier as being exceedingly
fair with Claimant. When Claimant failed to protect his assignment on
June 14, 19'(8, Carrier merely suspended him for 15 days and whey he failed
to prated his assignment at the end of that suspension it suspended hit
far another 30 days but put hit an notice that if he did not report for
work at the end of the second suspension he world be
dismissed
!rest
service.
It is clear to this Board that Carrier exerMssd a great deal of oostpassiam
for this etploye by giving him 45 days within which to clear up his problem
with his ex-wife. Had he dom so, Claimant, world only have been confronted
with a
15
day or no tsars than a
45
day suspension penalty. Tuns, we must
conclude that Claimant mane was responsible far his tennre is fail. Under
these circumstances we will not disturb the discipline.
FMIM: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board., after giving the
parties to this dispute due notice af hearing thereon, and
upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the Carrier and the Hnployes Involved la this dispute are
respectively Carrier sad Employes within the meaning of the pai7xay
Tabor
Act, as approved Jane 21, 1934;
That this Division a2 the Adjustment Hoard has jurisdiction
over the dispute involved herein; and
That the Agreement was not violated.
A W A & D
Chit denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD AnTIJBTe7.'
BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
mcsautive 3earetary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 26th day of February 1982.
~~cEi
E~`'