Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 28580
THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-28806
90-3-89-3-203
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Irwin M. Lieberman when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Burlington Northern Railroad Company (formerly The
Colorado and Southern Railway Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The dismissal of Section Foreman W. L. Jackson for alleged
violation of Rule 565, as amended by Superintendent's Notice No. 48, on July
24, 1988 was arbitrary, capricious, on the basis of unproven charges and in
violation of the Agreement (System File BN-88-28/DMWD 880928E CSR).
(2) The Claimant shall be reinstated to service with seniority and
all other rights unimpaired, he shall have his record cleared of the charge
leveled against him and he shall be compensated for all wage loss suffered."
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.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
Claimant herein, a Section Foreman, was dismissed by Carrier, following an Investigation, for violat
dismissal took place on July 23 and 24, 1988. The record indicates that he
had just been reinstated, on a leniency basis, from a prior dismissal for
violation of the same Rule and for theft.
Form 1 Award No. 28580
Page 2 Docket No. MW-28806
90-3-89-3-203
The record reveals, from Carrier's point of view, that the Roadmaster
supervising the section on the weekend in question, had received a phone call
from the dispatcher at about 3:20 A.M. indicating that the dispatcher had
received a call from Claimant asking permission to operate a Hy-Rail vehicle
on the main line. The dispatcher, according to the Roadmaster stated that
Claimant didn't seem to know exactly why he was out in the remote area of
Horse Creek, Wyoming. The Roadmaster instructed Claimant to meet him at the
Cheyenne Depot. When the two met at the Depot Claimant stated that he had
been called out earlier to investigate cattle which had been spotted on the
right of way in the vicinity of Horse Creek. The Roadmaster at that time
smelled the odor of alcohol on Claimant's breath. Two other Carrier officials
were called and appeared at the Depot and also smelled alcohol on Claimant's
breath. He admitted to these officials that he had had a beer on Saturday
afternoon before being called out. He was then asked to take a urine or blood
test to verify the issue but refused stating that he wished to consult his
Union representative first. He did not call his representucive and refused a
ride home, preferring to walk. He did act belligerently to the three Supervisors in the parking lot
Claimant, admitting to having a beer on Saturday afternoon, his
normal rest day, said he was called out due to the alleged cattle problem
first at about 7:00 P.M. and later at about 11:00 P.M. He denied that he was
under the influence of alcohol at the time of his interview with the various
Supervisors. He stated that he had been phoned by a particular Carrier clerk
with respect to the cattle problem, and was merely trying to fulfill his responsibilities.
The Board believes that Claimant's version of what transpired on the
evening in question is not credible or supported by the testimony adduced at
the Investigation. He had no corroboration of his story of being called out
by the clerk and there was no refutation of Carrier's witnesses' evidence with
respect to their investigation of the matter. Further, as this Board has said
on many prior occasions his failure to submit to a blood or urine test gave
Carrier the right to draw a negative inference. These facts, together with
Claimant's prior record of violation of the same Rule, supports Carrier's
decision to terminate the Claimant. For the foregoing reasons, the Claim must
be denied.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
Form 1 Award No. 28580
Page 3 Docket No. MW-28806
90-3-89-3-203
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
i
Attest:
~~i~ !~ (~ .
'°Nancy J.Dev er - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 16th day of October 1990.