- NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
r i ;3
Award Number 25047
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number CL-25035
. · John F. Cloney, Referee
.. ~' R9~3
· a'.;9Nt 7
}f ,
'·(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks,
( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood (GL-9713)
that:
(1) Carrier violated the Clerk-Telegrapher Agreement when on July
8, 1981, it imposed discipline of five (5) days overhead suspension upon Mrs.
Kathy S. Busey, Extra employee, Cumberland, Maryland, and concurrently on the
same date of July 8, 1981, did impose twenty (20) days' actual suspension
from service upon Mrs. Busey as a result of two (2) investigations conducted
on the dates of June 22 and 23, 1981, which action was unreasonable, unjustified
and discriminatory, and
(2) As a result of such improprieties, Carrier shall be required
to compensate Claimant Kathy S. Busey twenty (20) days' pay between the
suspension period of July 8, 1981 through and including July 28, 1981, and
that Mrs. Busey's service record be cleared of all notings of charges and
disciplinary measures administered.
OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant Kathy S. Busey was an Extra Clerk - Telegrapher
assigned to the Cumberland, Maryland Extra Board. She
testified she is guaranteed 40 hours but has "no work week as such, I am on a
seven day, 24 hour call, to protect vacancies as needed."
On July 8, 1981 the Carrier imposed a 5 day overhead suspension
after an investigation conducted on June 22 in
connection with
a charge of
failure to report for duty at 10:00 P. M. on June 8, 1981. Claimant admittedly
did not report until 11:22 P.M. On the same date the Carrier imposed a 15
day actual suspension after an investigation conducted on June 23 in
connection
with a charge of failure to protect an assignment as Extra Board employe by
refusing to accept a call to work as Operator at 11:00 P. M. on June 16, 1981.
The overhead suspension was reverted to actual suspension so that a twenty
day actual suspension was served. Claimant's permanent residence is in Martinsburg,
West Virginia. She maintains a temporary residence in Cumberland, Maryland.
Martinsburg, West Virginia is 80 miles from Cumberland.
The Organization contends Claimant was making an emergency visit to
her children in Martinsburg on June 8. Early that day she had accepted an
assignment to protect the 10:00 P.M. - 6:00 P.M. trick at Luke, Maryland
which is 110 miles from Martinsburg. The area is mountainous and the drive
is three hours. When she started to leave for Luke at 6:30 P. M. Claimant
developed automobile trouble. At 7:20 she called the General Clerk and asked
if she could fill the third-trick position she was scheduled to work. He
could not. At 8:20 P. M. Claimant again called the General Clerk, said she
had borrowed a car, and would be a little late.
Award Number 25047 ~, t~dg~2
/98
Locket Number CL-25035
On June 16, 1981 Claimant called the General Clerk on duty at r~land
at 10:00 A.M. and again at 11:45 A. M., asking if she would be called, stating
if not, she wanted to go to Martinsburg. Later, after an employe laid off
sick, efforts to reach Claimant in Cumberland were made and contact was finally
arranged through her mother's residence. Claimant informed the General Clerk
she couldn't make it and asked him to mark her off with permission. He said
he could not whereupon she told him to mark her off with upset stomach.
The Organization argues the circumstances related above constitute
mitigation. This Board notes however Claimant's failure to protect assignments
apparently are attributable to the distance between her permanent residence
and her duty station, a fact for which the Carrier cannot be required to bear
responsibility. The very essence of the position requires her availability.
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
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
Nancy J r - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 3rd day of October 1984.