On August 11, 1999 Trackman A. L. Pearson was directed to attend an August 19, 1999 Investigation regarding the alleged falsification of his application for employment, Form 15000. Specifically, the Carrier asserted that the Claimant had failed to indicate that he had been convicted of a misdemeanor.
Following said Investigation, the Claimant was found guilty of violating Maintenance of Way Rules 1.1-Safety, 1.6-Conduct, and 70.1-Safety Responsibilities in connection with falsifying his application for employment. As a result, the Claimant was assessed a Level 5 discipline under the Carrier's UPGRADE Discipline Policy and dismissed from service.
By letter dated October 29,1999, the Organization submitted a claim on behalf of the Claimant in which it maintained that discharge was excessive and unduly harsh, and that the Carrier had violated Rules 1, 4, and 45 of the Agreement in meting out same. Specifically, with respect to Rule 4, the Organization asserted that the Carrier had failed to take any action prior to the Claimant's probationary time limits, and thereafter accepted the Claimant's application for employment. Regarding the merits of the dispute, the Organization contends that the document which the Carrier produced relating to the Claimant's misdemeanor conviction was "nothing more than . a Carrier Lotus Note Database that anyone with a little computer knowledge can type up." The General Chairman further noted that the document was not a civil court record, and therefore, could not be accepted as proof of the Claimant's 1990 theft conviction.
The Carrier denied the claim contending that it had proved, with substantial evidence, that the Claimant was guilty of violating the Rules with which he was cited, and that the discipline imposed was reasonable and warranted in view of the seriousness of the offense.
A careful review of the record evidence convinces us that the Claimant knowingly and purposely falsified his application for employment. At the outset, the Claimant indicated only that he had nothing more than a "few" minor traffic violations. In that connection, however, the Claimant admitted that when he went to the local courthouse to "check" his record, the clerk indicated that there was an outstanding speeding ticket and "failure to appear" for same.
The Claimant's assertion that he "didn't remember" being convicted and that he was not "trying to hide anything" is simply not credible. Specifically, the Claimant maintained that he was simply "by-standing" when the theft occurred and that he had "forgotten" the conviction and probationary period until the Carrier "brought it up." In fact, however, it is not disputed that the Claimant was convicted of theft in July 1990, and thereafter convicted of providing false identification to a police officer in June 1992. Both aforementioned crimes were misdemeanors and the Claimant deliberately withheld this information on his employment application. Form 1 Award No. 36259
The Claimant certified the accuracy and truthfulness of his answers on the application for employment. Although the Claimant later admitted that he did have a past police record and not "just" traffic tickets, he was not forthcoming with the information on his employment application, despite a specific question regarding this information. In the circumstances, the Claimant's culpability has been clearly established, and therefore, this claim must be denied.
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an Award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.