AWARD N0. 520 Case No. 554
PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 1:58'?

 PART 1 M

 `1 '0 ) n
 DISPUTE) BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF PLAY EMPLOYEES

 THE A`fC1113CiN, TOPEKA AND SANTA FL RAILWAY COMPANY

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

 1. That the Carrier's decision to remove Central Region, Trackman
 Peter Grey from service was unjust.

 a. '1'ntl;. Crtt (..f11'ru.::t' nu" iv-iii:ital:u: Claimant ii'^y with seniority,
 vacation, all benefit rights unimpaired and pay for all wage loss
 as a result of investigation held 10:30 a.m. August 15, 1994 con
 tinuing forward and/or otherwise made whole, because the Carrier
 did not introduce substantial, creditable evidence that proved
 that the Claimant violated the rules enumerated in their decision,
 and even if Claimant violated the rules enumerated in the decision,
 removal from service is extreme and harsh discipline under the
 circumstances.

 3. That tire Carrier violated the Agreement, particularly but not
 limited to, Rule 13 and Appendix Ll, because tire Carrier did not
 introduce substantial, credible evidence that proved the Claimant
 violated the rules enumerated in their decision.

 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.

 _, chic dispute the Carrier notified the claimant and the Union that an investigation mould be held on August 5, 1994 at 2:U0 p.m. in Clovis, New f.IexicO. The Union requested a postponement, and pursuant t0 that requ<ac 1:111: Ca'iii,cr p^vstp:i.,^:1 t!:-°.. inveSt1F'%11:.'IC)n to August 15, 1994. The claimant was notified of this postponement by certified mail.

 The claimant did not appear for the investigation. again requested a postponement which was denied by Phil IS'olfersberger, Assistant General Chairman for hood of Maintenance of Way Employees appeared.

 The 1;eari.ng Of fi(:in.l asked :ar. 1101 fersherger if he had talked td" the claimant, and ire relil.ci(i that he trod not talked to him but hi:; office had. From that. information the Carrier postponed the investigation until one hour after the scheduled .starting;' time. At .11:04 a.m. the claimant still had not appeared, and the Carrier continued with the investigation.

 The Union the Carrier. the Brother-

fne claimant ;-.,as charged with violating Rules A, B, 1004, 1023, 'at:y a::d Genera:;. Rules for All Employees, Form 2629 Standard, .·.:f:<~<ci5:c: ,June ;i0, l~);i, as supplemented or amended.

 Track Supervisor .Cent. Gardner testified that on May 15, 1994 he was Assistant Roadmaster with the System Steel Gangs. He stated he knew the claimant who was assigned to Gang 2, 27002. Further he testified that on May 15, .1994 the claimant was absent from work and he hadnot seen or heard from the claimant again.

 Assistant Foreman Lee Ben testified that he was the Timekeeper for Steel Gang No. 2, and he received information that on that date an employee apparently was passed out right beside the outfit cars, :,.n·i thft (,e was ·Frinkiue: aJ.l day. He testified he went tothat ic,l;atlon and 0iiu nVV find n,°jlue, and when ::e walker thrr_ugrh the outfit cars he saw the claimant lying in his bunk. He stated he tried to wake the claimant up but could not do so.'

 This witness further testified that lie had not receiced a call from the claimant, and other officials from the railroad likewise had not received a call from the claimant. lie also testified that phone numbers were given to all employees in order that they could call if they were going to be absent.

 Tae Board has reviewed the entire transcript of record and finds there is no justification to set the termination of the claimant aside.

 AWARD: Claim denied.

                                neon Member


                              Carr for hiembe..