Gilbert H. Vernon, Referee

(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks, ( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Emplo PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company
1. Carrier violated the Clerks' Rules Agreement in Chicago, Illinois when it charged, held an investigation and assessed discipline of dismissal against Employe C. L. West.
 2. Carrier shall now be required to clear the record of Hiaploye C. L. 'West of the alleged charges and compensate her for all time lost commencing December 7, 1979 and continuing until she is returned to service.
 3. Carrier shall further be required to pay interest at the rate of 72 percent per annum compounded annually on the anniversary date of this claim on the amount due in Item 2 above.
 OPINION OF BOARD: The Claimant at the time of discharge was employed as a
 timekeeper which had assigned hours of 8:15 A.M. to 4:45 P.M.
 Monday through Friday. On September 27, 1979, a notice of investigation was dir
 ected to the Claimant which read in pertinent part as follows:



The investigation was postponed and held on November 30, 1979. Subsequent to the investigation the C dismissed the Claimant.

 There is little doubt that on September 13th the Claimant did not report to work until 9:43 A.M., on September 20th she did not report until 1:00 P.M. and on September 27th she did not report until 8:2 dates except September 27th, the Claimant, upon arrival at work, indicated her tardiness was caused On September 26th she called at 8:45 A.M., stating that she was coming in. At 11:00 A.M. she called indicating she missed her train.
 Award Number 24313
 Docket Number CL-23919

 Page 2

 The organization argues that the Claimant cannot be held in violation of Company rules against tardiness because the Grievant was detained from work due to sickness which under Rule 25 would preclude disciplinary action. They provide a variety of documents from the various doctors that they believe sup port the Claimant's assertion that she was ill. Moreover, the Organization suggests that the instant offense would not justify dismissal.

 It is the Board's conclusion that the Organization has failed to overcome the prima facie nature of the Carrier's case. The Organization defends Ms. West by, claiming she was sick and providing documents from doctors. However, upon review of the doctors' statements and records it cannot be concluded that they establish in a convincing way that the Claimant was prevented or detained from reporting on time on the dates in question as a result of her sickness.
 Regarding the quantum of disciplines normally discharge would not be upheld for being tardy Pour different days,. but in view of the Claimant's past record,, dismissal is not excessive, arbitrary or capricious. Her past record indicates that she had previously received tan reprimeands, a 30-day deferred suspension and a 60-day actual suspension fox similar offenses. Her record distinguishes her as either unwilling or unable to fulfill the responsibilities of her employment. In view thereof the Claim will be denied.

That the parties waived oral hearing;

 That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes with'" 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 WA R D
Cla im denied.

 ATTEST: Acting Executive Secretary

BY

Dated at Chicago Illinois, this 14th day of April 1983.


eECEI VJUP! 2 s 1983 v

 NATIONAL RAILROAD
 By Order of Third Divas on