PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0. 2206
AWARD N0. 64
CASE NO. 66
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE
OF WAY EMPLOYEZS
and
BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
:
Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
1. The dismissal of Sectionman Philip D. Wika was without
just and sufficient cause and wholly disproportionate to
the alleged offense. (System File T-M-282C)
2. Sectionman Philip D. Wika be returned to service, paid for
all straight time and overtime that he could have worked
had he not been dismissed from service.
OPINION OF BOARD
:
In October 1979 Claimant was assigned as Sectionman on Surface Gang
No. 3 at Doan, Iowa on the Twin City Seniority District. He failed to show
up for work on Thursday, October 11, 1979 and did not contact his supervisor
at any time that day. On October 15, 1979 he was notified to appear for
investigation into his "alleged absence from duty without proper authority
on October 11, 1979". Claimant appeared at the investigation on October 25,
1979 with his representative, Vice Chairman Klippenes of the BMWE. At the
investigation, Claimant admitted being absent without authority and stated
that the reason for this was because he "was in no shape to drive to work"
- G
GZ
0~ - .~tv0 to
due to drinking the night before. He further stated that he had an alcohol
problem and "would like to dry out". He concurred with his representative's
statement that he "would like to enter a social program with the BN where he
could take treatment to overcome the problem of alcohol".
After reviewing the evidence, and in consideration of Claimant's unrefuted prior disciplinary record of five, fifteen and thirty day suspensions
for being AWOL on several occasions during the period June-October 1978,
Carrier terminated his employment. On appeal it was developed that Claimant
had enrolled in Carrier's Alcohol Dependency Program for treatment but did
not stay the course and failed to follow through on the counselor's recommendations. Had Claimant demonstrated a solid effort to deal with his problem,
perhaps a different result could be reached in this case. However, the burden
was upon him to show that in addition to admitting his problem he was making
an effort to do something about it and stood a reasonable chance of recovery.
He has failed to do so on this record and Carrier was not unreasonable in
concluding that he was either unable or unwilling to maintain regular and
punctual attendance at work.
AWARD'
Claim denied.
Employe Member Carrier Member
6~7