PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it improperly closed the service record of Trackman M. A. McManus as of November 15, 1982 (System Locket CR-127).
(2) The Claimant shall be returned to service with seniority and all other rights unimpaired and he shall be compensated for all wage loss suffered.
OIPINION OF BOARD: Claimant was incarcerated for one of the more serious and
 endangering offenses -- drinking and driving. He was sentenced
 to 45 days, beginning October 20, 1982; his release, somewhat early, was on
 November 24, 1982, according to correspondence in the record. Meantime, by
 certified mail under date of November 15, 1982, and addressed to Claimant,
 Carrier sent out a letter stating:




Rule 28 of the Agreement, at the center of the controversy here, reads:




Claimant's confinement here was in consequence of his own illegal action. It does not excuse the 35 days' time of absence, without permission, that it took Claimant to give first notification and some explanation such as an acceptable justification offered to Carrier to account for his whereabouts. The acceptable answer to be found, if at all, lies in Rule 28.
 Award Number 25648
 Locket Number NW-25710
Page 2
In particular, our attention is invited to the ·sickness· circumstances and to the 'beyond control' circumstances, made as exceptions to Rule 28, on the organization's premise that Claimant if he qualifies as a stated exception will not forfeit seniority. The Organization makes the arguments that, first, alcoholism is a recognized illness and, second, being arrested and serving out time in confinement for driving while under influence of the alcohol is a circumstance beyond the control of someone who when alcohol-intoxicated then chooses to drive. We do not find the arguments persuasive that Claimant fits in as an exception and that sickness or circumstances beyond his control were the cause or causes of Claimant's absence. As stated, it was his own personal conduct, violation of the law, that was avoidable and that made for the situation which resulted in the unauthorized absence.
When the exceptions as provided for in the Rule do not apply, Rule 28 is practically self-executing in its provision that a Employe who is absent in excess of fourteen (14) consecutive days without receiving permission from his Supervisor will forfeit all seniority. Both sections, (a) and (b), require affirmative action of Claimant with the promptness specified, and assuredly timely action by Claimant if he desires to maintain seniority under 28(b). Claimant alleges that, on some date intervening but unspecified, he was by then signed up for sickness benefits; being signed up for benefits is no substitute for notifying the Supervisor or seeking and obtaining his permission for a 35 day absence within the first 14 days thereof.
We will deny the claim. Carrier could validly close out Claimant from its seniority rosters and close his service record when so specifically authorized, and Carrier properly did so under the authorization it found in the Agreement under Rule 28.
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.
CZair denied.
'Nancy J. v,r - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30 Secretary
th day of September 1985
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD - p

                            -7)

By Order of Third Division
 ' ~4
 ~~u7 n,=i

                n u w ,


. ~)7(Ca~O ~~(~\Ge