PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0. 2120
NORFOLK AND WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY
. AND.
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS
System Council No. 25
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
Claim on behalf of J. Liggins, Jr. as a result of
the Carrier dismissing Mr. Liggins from all service
with the Carrier.
CLAIM OF EMPLOYEE
1. That the Norfolk and Western Railway company
be ordered to reinstate Mr. Liggins to service
with the Carrier as an Electrician at the Lambert
Point Car Shop.
2. That the Carrier be ordered to compensate
Mr. Liggins for all lost wages that resulted
in his dismissal from the services of the Carrier
and reinstate his seniority unimpaired with all
vacation rights and other fringe benefits and
clear his personal record of any and all charges
shown in his record. (Claim as stated in the
organization's submission)
DISCUSSION
This Public Law Board finds that the parties are Carrier
and Employee within the meaning of the. Railway Labor Act,
as amended, and that this Board has jurisdiction.
Claimant, J. Liggins, Jr., was notified by mail dated
August 12, 1982 that be was dismissed from the service
as a result of the investigation of held on July 20, 1982.
The Board has considered the entire record in this
case including the record of the investigation, the position
papers submitted prior to the Board's convening on Wednesday,
April 13, 1983, the statements of J. Liggins and his counsel
during the Board's session and all exhibits provided by
the Organization and the Carrier relating to the subject
case.
' 2
Upon this record, the Chairman and Neutral Member
of the Board finds as follows:
The Claimant was dismissed under the Carrier's General
Rule G, quoted below:
"G. the use of alcoholic beverages,
intoxicants or
narcotics by employees subject to duty, ortheir
possession or use while on duty or on Company property
is prohibited." ..
Specifically, the Claimant was dismissed upon the
findings of the Carrier's Protection Department and his
admission that he had participated in the
smoking of
a
marijuana cigarette on company property during the Claimant's
lunch period.
No dispute exists as to the real facts of this case. _
A few of the employee allegations are addressed as
follows:
1. that a penalty of dismissal is to severe a penalty
for the violation of the Carrier rule involved;
2. that Rule G is too broad a rule for application
to this situation;
3. that the Claimant was coerced or tricked into his
agreement that he had participated in the smoking of a
marijuana cigarette; and, .
4. that the Claimant was not provided representation
during the initial investigation of the incident.
Without addressing all of the above in detail, it
is an acknowledged fact that .the Claimant participated
in the incident giving raise to his dismissal. It is further
acknowledged that the Claimant was cooperative with the
Carrier representatives who conducted the initial
investigation.
Rule G, as read by the Chairman, is clear and unambigous.
It definitively covers this specific situation. It is
further am established and acknowledged fact that the problem
of narcotics and drugs and their control in the railroad
industry is of paramount importance to the safeguarding
of equipment, the safety of employees and the safety of
the communities through which rail transportation moves.
The allegation of no representation is without
foundation in that delay in investigation of any number
of employee relations problems would
be
tantamount to delays
~.v roMcurkv-!`orr~nr ioi3-.nn nnrrr~L19..zarr..
t_~ ____-
.'"~
- Award No. 51
· PLB No. 2120
3
It is true than an employee is entitled to
representation where a delay would not impinge upon an
effective and objective investigation of an incident but
where timeliness is of significance and where delay would
pose an undue burden upon the Carrier and the employee,
no immediate representation is mandated.
The practices of Carrier investigations in this industry
are well defined and accepted by the parties thereto.
With regard to the coercion or trickery inference,
it cannot be considered seriously based upon the record
of the investigation.
The objective examination of the record of investigation
reveals that the Claimant did in fact participate in the
smoking of a marijuana cigarette by his own admission and
that marijuana seeds were present in his personal car.
The penalty of dismissal is not considered excessive
or harsh or undeserving under the total circumstances of
this case.
AWARD
The claim is denied.
'. RECOMMENDATION
-it is the view of the Chairman that certain
circumstances of the Claimant's work record require a special
consideration. Accordingly, it is the recommendation of
the Chairman that the Carrier Member take any action that
Will
provide an opportunity for the prompt return of the
- Claimant to employment with the N & W as a new hire.
This award dated this 18th day of April, 1983. -
ck sieA ,-Cairman and Neutral teem er
W. L. A lman, Jr., Carrier Mem er
V. T. Wi ki s, OrganUation Member