NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Locket Number SG-25011
I. M. Lieberman, Referee
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(The Long Island Rail Road Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
on The Long Island Rail Road.
Appeal of the 10-working day suspension assessed on Signalman T&T P.
W. Lyde effective February 8, 1982.
OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant was charged with excessive absenteeism and also
violation of the Sick Leave Agreement in that he could not
be contacted at the place where he gave notice he could be found during his
illness. Following an investigation held on January 27, 1982, Claimant received
a ten-day suspension, having been found guilty of the charges.
In the course of the handling of this matter, both sides raised a
number of procedural arguments. A careful evaluation of the contentions indicates
that none of those arguments is persuasive. Similarly, Petitioner's arguments
relative to the conduct of the hearing are without merit.
The record indicates that Claimant had been absent for 26 days from
September 30, 1981 through January 20, 1982; this is not in dispute. Further,
it is indicated that the absences were related to an on-duty injury sustained
by Claimant (a back injury). On January 13, 1982 a Carrier official attempted
to contact Claimant by telephone at the location where he had indicated he
could be found during his illness. Four phone calls were made and Claimant did
not respond. Subsequently, Claimant testified as to the reasons he did not
respond to two of the calls.
Section 12 of the Sick Leave Agreement provides as follows:
"Section 12. If a representative of the Carrier calls
at the place where the absent employe gave notice that he
could be found during his illness, or in the absence of such
notice, calls at the home of the absent employe and cannot
find him, the absent employe will be deemed to be absent
without leave. Such employe will not be granted sick leave
and will be subject to appropriate disciplinary action in
accordance with the provisions of the existing agreement.
Award Number 25290 Page 2
Locket Number SG-25011
As the Board views it, while there may be some doubt with respect to the excessive
absenteeism charge (due to the work related injury) there is no question but
that Carrier was unable to contact Claimant on January 13th. For that reason
only, the claim must be denied. Obviously the penalty imposed, in the light of
Claimant's prior record, was not discriminatory nor excessive.
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
.Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Attest:
Nancy J.,,.eep r - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of February 1985.
:r
ri
,Lf