PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0. 1582
PARTIES) THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY
TO )
DISPUTE) BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim in behalf of former Trackman Howard
Faust, r., Hi= Division, for removal of 30 demerits assessed
his personal. record as a result of formal investigation held on
September 16, 1977.
Claim in behalf of former Trackman Howard Faust, Jr., Middle Division, for reinstatement "with seniority, vacation and with all other
rights unimpaired, also with pay for all wage loss that resulted
from his removal effective October 11, 1977, continuing forward,"
account a11egedly dismissed from service without benefit of a fair
and impartial investigation held on October 11, 1977.
FINDINGS: This Public Law Board No. 1582 finds that the parties
e~rei'~n 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 assessed thirty demerits pursuant
to an investigation held September 16, 1977. Thereafter another
investigation was held on October 11, 1977; and the claimant was
dismissed from the service for an accumulation of excessive demerits.
The Board has examined the. transcript of record for the first investigation and finds there was sufficient evidence to establish that
the claimant was guilty of violating Rules 13, 15 and 16 of the General Rules for the Guidance of Employees. There is no evidence to
support a finding that thirty demerits is harsh, arbitrary or unjust
for such violation.
The Organization contends that the claimant was not properly notified
of the change of time and date of the investigation, and therefore,
was not afforded due process. The Organization also contends that
the Carrier failed to conduct an impartial investigation.
Evidence indicates that the claimant's representative telephoned
prior to 9:00 a.m. on September 16, 1977 and requested that the
formal
investigation be
deferred until later that date. The investigation was postponed. until 2:30 p.m. Therefore the evidence does
not support a finding that the claimant was denied due process.
The claimant had a poor record and had previously been dismissed
from service and had.accumulated a total of eighty demerits. The
eLa
15
sa
Award No. 94
Page 2
evidence, therefore, does not justify overruling the decision of
the Carrier.
AWARD: Claim denied.
'
lot
fires on re, a rman
y
Organization member
in
-4 /;
tL.
CitrrierVMem er