Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
Prior to his dismissal, Claimant had established and held seniority as a Track Foreman. He had 27 years in Carrier's service. At the time of the incident precipitating this claim, Claimant and his crew had been replacing crossties at grade crossings in the vicinity of Fabens, Texas, over a period of several months. As the old ties accumulated, the supervising Roadmaster instructed Claimant to dispose of them. Claimant complied with the Roadmaster's instructions by trucking the scrap crossties from the right of way and stockpiling them at his home or taking them directly to "customers." He received a total of $1,288.00 for sale of the crossties, which he retained.
Claimant admitted his actions during testimony at Carrier's subsequent Investigation. The only defense offered by Claimant was that he "had the authority to dispose of (the crossties)", and thus felt he was not committing any sort of violation. At the Hearing he admitted to having some doubts about whether he was entitled to sell the ties, but did not feel obligated to clarify the matter with any Carrier supervisor. There is no evidence on the record that Claimant used Carrier's vehicles to transport the ties to his house or directly to customers, but in light of his admitted theft, that issue is moot.
The Organization suggested that in view of Claimant's seniority and long (18-year) unblemished record, he should not have incurred the ultimate penalty of dismissal. In this case, Claimant's extended seniority with Carrier suggests that he should have been well aware of any Rules prohibiting his conduct. It has been consistently held by this and other Boards that dishonesty constitutes sufficient grounds for dismissal irrespective of the employee's past record or length of service. Moreover, we have also held that a leniency reinstatement is made, almost without exception, at the sole discretion of the Carrier. Accordingly the instant claim is denied.
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.