AWARD NO. 393
Case No. 426
PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 1582
PARTIES) ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY
TO )
DISPUTE) BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
1. Carrier's decision to remove former Plains Division Trackman
B. R. Thurman from service, effective January 9, 1987, was unjust.
2. Accordingly, Carrier should be required to reinstate claimant
Thurman to service-with his seniority rights unimpaired and com
pensate him for all wages lost from January 9, 1987.
FINDINGS: This Public Law Board No. 1582 finds that the parties
herein are Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway
Labor Act, as amended, and that this Board has jurisdiction.
In this dispute the claimant was notified to attend a formal investigation in Amarillo, Texas on December 8, 1986 concerning his
allegedly being absent without authority on November 11, 1986 and
to determine the facts and place the responsibility, if any, involving possible violation of Rules 13 and 15 of the General Rules
for the Guidance of Employees, 1978. The investigation was postponed until January 9, 1987.
Rule 13 reads as follows:
"Employees must not be absent from duty without proper
authority, and when authorized absence is in excess of
ten (10) calendar days, entire absence mustbe authorized
by formal leave of absence (Form 1516 Standard) except
for scheduled vacation period."
Rule 15 reads as follows:
"Employees must report for duty at the prescribed time and
place and devote themselves exclusively to their duties
during the tour of duty. Those subject to call for duty
will be at their usual calling place, or provide information as to where they may be located. They must not absent
themselves from duty, exchange duties or substitute other
persons in their places without proper authority."
Foreman T. J. Keeling testified that he was an Extra Gang Foreman
on Gang No. 60 in Woodward, Oklahoma. He stated that on November
11, 1986 the claimant did not report to work and that the following day he simply stated that he screwed up and didn't call.
Award No. 393
Page 2
Foreman Keeling stated that the claimant did not mention that he
was sick on that date, but a note from a doctor was introduced
stating that the claimant was under his care on the date in
question. He also stated that the claimant knew where he was
staying in Woodward, Oklahoma and could have called him. He
also testified that the claimant worked the previous day and
mentioned nothing about needing a day off for an appointment
with the doctor.
The claimant admitted he did not have permission to be absent on
November 11, 1986 and that he did not work on that date. The
claimant stated that he did not tell his foreman he was sick on
that date because he did not think it was necessary. Claimant
testified the doctor diagnosed his illness as bronchial pneumonia and he had to be in the hospital for two weeks.
The claimant testified that when he made the statement to Foreman Keeling that he screwed up, he was referring to the fact that
he did not call, not the fact that he screwed up by being absent.
He testified that his absence was due to his being very sick.
The Board has examined all the evidence of record, including the
testimony and the exhibits submitted. The claimant's discipline
record has been reviewed. Under the circumstances herein it is
the opinion of the Board that permanent discharge is too severe.
The Carrier is directed to reinstate the claimant with seniority
and all other rights unimpaired but without pay for time lost.
AWARD: Claim sustained as per above.
ORDER: The Carrier is directed-to comply with this award within
thirty days from the date of this award.
Preston(~X.Moore, Chairman
Union embe
Carrier Member