File MW-FTW-85-35


Parties Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
 to and
 Dispute Norfolk and Western Railway Company

 Statement
 of Claim: Claim on behalf of G. A. LeMay requesting reinstatement
 and pay for time lost as a result of his dismissal for
 insubordination.

 Findings: The Board has jurisdiction of this case by reason of
 the parties Agreement establishing this Board.
 Claimant was dismissed for insubordination. The
 incidents that led to the formal investigation permitting
 the discharge concern the use of a Company vehicle for
 travelling home on the weekends. The Claimant's days off.
 Claimant began working in Springfield, Illinois as a
 Foreman on April 4, 1988. He asked his direct supervisor
 Roadmaster McGinnis if he was allowed to drive the company
 truck to his residence on weekends. Mr. McGinnis advised
 the Claimant he could not take the vehicle home as there was
 potential liability associated with that type of usage. The
 Roadmaster further explained that taking the truck home on
 weekends would place both of their jobs in jeopardy.
 Claimant made a similar request on April 9. It was again
 refused.
 Roadmaster McGinnis, at the end of April, had received
 and was reviewing the gasoline receipts of the employees
 that used the Company vehicle. He noted that the Claimant
 had purchased gas for the truck on April 10, which was a
 Sunday. Mr. McGinnis reiterated his prior instructions to
 Claimant that he was never to drive the Company vehicle hone
 on weekends without his permission or to take it home for
 personal use.
 Mr. McGinnis noticed that over the weekend of May 21
 22, 1988 that Claimant's vehicle was not parked in the
 Company headquarters. On Monday, May 23rd the Roadmaster
 asked the Claimant where the truck had been over the prior
 weekend. The Claimant told him that he had taken it home.
 It was later noted that he had made two separate gasoline
 purchases on May 22 on the Company charge account.
 Claimant was notified on May 26 to attend a formal
 investigation regarding charges of insubordination in
                                  1016 -2-Award No. 95


        connection with driving Company vehicle 7531 on May 19, 1988. The investigation was finally held on July 26, 1988. Based on the evidence adduced Carrier concluded that Claimant was guilty as charged. He was dismissed from service as discipline therefor.


        Claimant was accorded the due process to which entitled under Rule 30, insubordination in the circumstances herein was a major offense. As pointed out by Second Division Award 5360 (Knotts):


        "..insubordination in particular and major infractions in general had been found in previous awards to be proper cases for pre-hearing suspension."


        There was sufficient evidence adduced to support Carrier's conclusion as to Claimant culpability.


        The Board finds reason to conditionally reinstate Claimant to service with all rights unimpaired but without pay for time out of service on a last chance basis. He will be placed in a probation status for 6 months during which time Rule 30 is applicable to him. Claimant is given the last chance opportunity to demonstrate to the Company and to the Union that he desires to be a cooperative and understanding employee.


Award: Claim disposed of as per findings.

        Order: Carrier is directed to make this Award effective within thirty (30) days of date of issuance shown below.


S. A'. `Hammohs; Jr.,,~ee Member . ~ Miller, CarrO*-Member

Arthur T. Van Wart, Chairman

and Neutral Member


        Issued August 14, 1989.