40
PUBLIC LAW BOARD 1831P
(MW-BVE-77-75)
Case No. 10
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees
and
Norfolk and Western Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
1. The carrier violated the effective Agreement
dated February 1,.1951, when it administered
harsh and unjustified discipline of dismissal
on claimant H. E. Alexander.
2. The claimant be restored to service with
seniority and benefits unimpaired and payment
allowed for the assigned working hours actually
lost, less any
earnings in
the service of the
company.
FINDINGS:
This Board upon the whole record and all the evidence
finds that:
The carrier and employee involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employee within the meaning of the Railway
Labor Act, as amended.
This Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
OPINION:
Claimant was hired as a Laborer on May 31, 1977. The
record shows that the Claimant was absent thereafter in July,
and numerous .days in August and September. By letter dated
October 24, 1977, the Claimant was notified of a hearing in
connection with his "habitual and chronic absenteeism."
As a result, he was removed from service. The Claimant asserts
,q~r
3a- iS~°~
UL health, Abstantiated and personallroblems. The
Organization asserts-.the-procedural defense of an improper
hearing and that the Carrier did not provide progressive
discipline.. All. such defenses fall upon barren gm and;
indeed, as a near employee the Claimant owed a demonstration
of his worthiness-instead of a persistent, clearly unsatis
factory record of-attendance. He admits to having been re- -
peatedly warned:-of the consequences of a continuation of
such untoward practices -- to na avail The Carrier has
a clear right to be able to expect regular attendance of
its employees;~.such was not the case here.
AWARD:
t
Claim. is. denied-
4.
4..
~..
,Tame P.. Scearce, Neutral Member
C. C... Edwards,, Carrier Member W. E. LaRue.,
Organization Member
Dated at
a
.T6
Autt
r
this / Z day of ; 198
-2-