Docket MW-DEC-75-88
Parties 'Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees
to and
Dispute Norfolk and Western Railway Company

Statement 1. Carrier'vlolated the effective agreement by dismissing
of M. L. Johnson and J. C, Flanery on December 1, 1975 on
Claim unjust and unproven charges. (Later changed to 45 days
actual suspension.)
2. Claimants M. L. Johnson and J. C. Flanery shall be
paid for all time held out of service and the hearing
be stricken from their records.





        Page 2 behind the depot. They advised the Roadmaster they had been working at the Plastic Plant. Since the Roadmaster had been there on two separate occasions and had not located Claimants he thereupon dismissed them from service for not following his instructions and not performing work as directed.


        A hearing was requested under Rule.20 of the effective Agreement.- A formal investigation was held on January 5, 1975:

. "to determine your responsibility in connection
        with being dismissed from service on December 1,

        1975 at approximately 3:55 PM by J. A. McBride,

        Track Supervisor, without first being given a

        fair and impartial hearing."

        As a result of such hearing Carrier concluded Claimants

        had not followed instructions.. Nonetheless, Carrier miti

        gated their discipline from a dismissal to a forty-five

        (45) day actual suspension. _


        Rule 20 of the Schedule Agreement between the parties, effective December 1, 1963, reads:

              "DISCIPLINE AND GRIEVANCE.

              (a) An Employee who is disciplined or dismissed

        ' without first being given a fair and impartial

              hearing will, on written request (made either

              in person or through a duly authorized representa

              tive of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way

              EmRloyees) to the immediate Supervisor, made

              within ten (10) calendar days of advice of

              discipline or dismissal, be given a ,fair and

              impartial hearing within ten (10) calendar days

              after receipt by the Supervisor of such request.

                            PG l3 ~j,®-Award No. 21

                            Page 3


          'At the request of either party the hearing will be postponed. The hearing will not be postponed in excess of ten (10) calendar days beyond the date first set for it to be held except by Agreement between the Company and the General Chairman ...." The General Chairman requested a hearing under Rule 20 under date of December 5, 1975. He advised that he would be available December 9 and 10, in Decatur, for formal investigation. However, the Division Engineer - Maintenance under-date of December 9, 1975 set a formal investigation for January 5, 1976.


          At the outset of the hearing the General Chairman protested the fact that the hearing wasn't being held as provided in Rule 20 within the required time limits. The protest was completely ignored. A procedural violation such as this makes the investigation null and void ab initio. There is no cause to review the case on its merits. Therefore, this claim will be sustained on the basis of the procedural. error.


Award Claim sustained as per findings.
          Order Carrier is directed to make this Award effective within thirty (30) days of date of issuance shown below,


M. A. Christie, mp 'oyee Member co s, Carrier e er
                                                    m


                  GCG~

                  Arthur T. Van Wart, Chairman

                  · and Neutral Member

Issued at Salem, New,Jersey, April 4, 1980.