Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 27894
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. CL-28249
 89-3-88-3-27
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Peter R. Meyers when award was rendered.
 (Transportation Communications International Union
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company

(a) Carrier violated the rules of the current Clerks' Agreement at Los Angeles, California, on December 8, 1986 when it wrongfully removed Ms. S. Sanders from the service of the Carrier, and

 (b) Claimant S. Sanders shall now be reinstated into the service of the Carrier, with all past rights restored on the basis they were prior to her dismissal from the service of the Carrier on December 8, 1986, and with pay for all time lost from December 8, 1986, forward."

 FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

 The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

 This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.

Claimant was employed as a word processing operator by the Carrier at its Los Angeles, California, facility. Claimant was on a medical leave of absence that was due to expire on November 15, 1986. In November, Carrier requested that Claimant have her personal physician forward copies of her medical records to Carrier's Chief Medical Officer for review. Carrier subsequently notified Claiman 1986. Claimant did not report for work on that date. On December 16, 1986, Carrier notified Claimant that she had forfeited her seniority by failing to report for duty after her leave of absence. The Organization thereafter filed a Claim on Claimant's behalf, challenging her dismissal from service.

 This Board has reviewed the record in this case, and we find that the Carrier refused to extend its leave of absence beyond November 15, 1986. The refusal was based on a review of the Claimant's medical records and a statement by her doctor given Form 1 Award No. 27894
 Page 2 Docket No. CL-28249
 89-3-88-3-27

 Claimant that she must report for duty on December 8, 1986. The Claimant did not report for duty at the required time, and her seniority was terminated pursuant to Rule 21(c) after the expiration of the required period.

 This Board has ruled on several occasions in the past that Rule 21(c) is self-executing and does not constitute discipline. (Third Division Awards 22327, 25837, 24413, and 24681.)




                          By Order of Third Division


Attest:
        ancy J. D er Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 4th day of May 1989.