(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks, ( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Belt Railway Company of Chicago

(1) Carrier violated the effective Clerks' Agreement when, following an investigation held on September 13, 1984, it dismissed Ms. Arlene C. Miller from service effective September 20, 1984;

 (2) Carrier shall now restore Ms. Miller to service with her seniority and all other rights unim including any potential overtime; and shall clear her record of the charges placed against her."

 OPINION OF BOARD: On August 27, 1984, Claimant, a Clerk in Carrier's Car
 Operations Department in Chicago, Illinois, was issued the following Notice of Investigation:




                      Docket Number CL-26568


          If you desire a representative, please arrange."


As a result of the Investigation, Claimant was found guilty as charged and dismissed from Carrier's service effective September 20, 1984. The organization's appeal of that decision was denied and the Claim has been advanced to this Hoard for a final determination.

 Carrier argues that Claimant was in fact guilty of excessive absenteeism and that the penalty im requirements of Rule 62 1/2 (Sick Leave/Personal Leave Allowance-Absenteeism), following progressive steps in the educational/disciplinary process. Claimant had accumulated one hundred demerits and continued to accumulate unauthorized days of absence beyond the 5 percent limit. It further argues that on July 29, 1984, Claimant was allowed to return to work after a two-week period of convalescence. She marked off sick on August 1, 2, 15, and 23, but these absences were without permi and Claimant failed to provide acceptable medical evidence to show that she had suffered a serious illness on those dates. Given Claimant's exceedingly poor record, it argues the penalty of dismissal was appropriate.

 The Organization argues that Claimant was in fact ill on the dates in question and therefore was not guilty of unauthorized absenteeism. An employe who is legitimately ill is not required to obtain permission to be absent. Further, Claimant was not advised that her absences were improper prior to being charged. Claimant m but her past record has no bearing in this instance because the present charges have not been proven. For all these reasons, the Organization argues, the Claim should be sustained.

 In reviewing the record of this case, the Board notes that Claimant was twice offered reinstatement to Carrier's service on a leniency basis with full seniority and record intact. This offer was contingent on the provision that a continuation of Claimant's past absenteeism would not be tolerated.

 This Board must conclude that Claimant would have been well advised to accept that offer. The record shows that Claimant did fail to provide acceptable evidence to indi of the dates in question and that proper evidence was clearly required in this instance.

 Claimant's past attendance, adjudged by any standard, is poor. There comes a time in the employment relationship when an employer may be justified in terminating an employe who is absent an excessive amount of time, even for the most valid of reasons. While employers are bound by certain obligations to their employes, so too do these employees have an obligation to be available for work on a regula
                      Award Number 26187 Page 3

                      Docket Number CL-26568


By this Award, we are returning Claimant to work with seniority and all other rights unimpaired, but without backpay.

        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 discipline was excessive.


                        A W A R D


        Claim sustained in accordance with the opinion.


                              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                              By order of Third Division


Attest:
        Nancy J r - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 24th day of November 1986.