Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 32087
Docket No. CL-31975
97-3-94-3-332
The Third Division consisted
of
the regular members and in addition Referee
Herbert L. Marx, Jr. when award was rendered.
(Transportation Communications International Union
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim
of
the System Committee
of
the Organization (GL-11052) that:
1. The Carrier acted in an arbitrary, capricious and unjust manner
and in violation
of
Rule 24
of
the Agreement when, by notice
of
March 6, 1992, it assessed discipline of five days suspension, held in
abeyance for six months against Reservation Sales Agent, Ms. Essie
King.
2. The Carrier shall,
if
she is ever required to serve the suspension, be
immediately required to reinstate Claimant to service with seniority
rights unimpaired and compensate her an amount equal to what she
could have earned, including but not limited to daily wages,
overtime and holiday pay, had discipline not been assessed.
3. The Carrier shall now expunge the charges and discipline from
Claimant's record."
FINDINGS:
The Third Division
of
the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the
evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved in this dispute
are respectively carrier and employee within the meaning
of
the Railway Labor Act, as
approved June 21, 1934.
Form i Award No. 32087
Page 2 Docket No. CL-31975
97-3-94-3-332
This Division
of
the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved
herein.
Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
The Claimant, a Reservation Sales Agent, was subject to an Investigative Hearing
under the following specification:
"In that while on duty October 21, 1992 during the approximate
time frame of 9:15 a.m. through 12:15 p.m., you were observed by
Supervisor William Pedroza not attending to your duties of handling calls
as a reservation sales agent for a total of thirty-seven (37) minutes, which
represents unmanned time of twenty-four (24) percent."
The Organization provides unconvincing arguments as to the Carrier's allegedly
imprecise application
of
productivity standards; alleged unspecified disparity
of
treatment; and the fact that the Claimant was counseled on the day in question and then
made subject to a Hearing and subsequent penalty.
The penalty in question was a five-day suspension, to be held in abeyance
of six
months. With the Carrier convinced as to the Claimant's inattention to her assigned
position during the period
of
observation, a review of the Claimant's record is
appropriate in assessing degree of discipline. Remarkably, the Claimant had been
subject to 18 verbal or formal counsefngs over a three-year period, most
of
them for
"low productivity." In addition, the Claimant was subject to a ten-day suspension (five
days deferred) in reference to call handling.
The Board finds no basis to disturb the Carrier's assessment that discipline was
warranted, following the Claimant's failure to perform satisfactorily after an astonishing
number
of
counsefngs.
AWARD
Claim denied.
Form 1 Award No. 32087
Page 3 Docket No. CL-31975
97-3-94-3-332
ORDER
This Board, after consideration
of
the dispute identified above, hereby orders that
au award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order
of
Third Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 9th day
of
July 1997.