-4
f
r ;.
PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0. 2444
Award No. 19
Case No. 29
Docket No. MW 79-67
Parties Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees
to and
Dispute: Southern Pacific Transportation Company
(Texas. and Louisiana Lines)
Statement 1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when B&B Carpenter
of G. G. Edmondson was unjustly dismissed on March 27, 1979.
Claim: 2. Claimant G. G. Edmondson shall be reinstated to his former position
with pay for all time lost and with all seniority, vacation and
other rights restored.
Findings: The Board, after hearing upon the whole record and all evidence, finds
that the parties herein are Carrier and Employee within the meaning of
the Railway Labor Act, as amended, that this Board is duly constituted
by Agreement dated July 19, 1979, that it has jurisdiction of the
parties and the subject matter and that the parties were given due notice
of the hearing held.
Claimant, a B&B Carpenter on B&B Gang No. 3, was advised by his Division
Engineer under date of March 28, 1979, as follows:
"On March 26, 1979 you did not seek or receive authority to be
absent from your job prior to your assigned working. hours. This
is in violation of Rule M810 of the general rules and regulations
of the Southern Pacific Transportation Company, as posted by
General Notice, effective April 1, 1978 which reads in part as
follows:
Rule M810
'Employes must report for duty at the prescribed time and place
...They must not absent themselves from their employment without
proper authority ...'
Your call at 12:35 p.m. on March 26, 1979 stating that you had had
your car repaired and would return to work the following day
does not excuse your absence on March 26, 1979 and does not relieve
you of the responsibility of calling your supervisor prior to your
assigned working hours.
r
'Page 2
O4`/(/-
Award No. 19
For your violation of Rule M810, you are dismissed from the
service of the Southern Pacific Transportation Company., You
are instructed to turn in all company property . . ."
Claimant requested and was granted a hearing by his Division Engineer.
It was held on May 15, 1979. As a result thereof Claimant was advised
that his dismissal would stand.
The record supports that the Claimant was properly handled in accordance
with Article 14 - Discipline and Grievances.
There was sufficient evidence adduced to support the conclusion reached
by Carrier. As to the degree of discipline imposed, the record reflects
that Claimant had been previously dismissed January 25, 1978 for a
similar violation. He was granted reinstatement therefor on a leniency
basis March 7, 1978.
In the circumstances present, this claim will be denied.
Award: Claim denied.
M. Christie, Employee Member- C. B. Goyne, a ier Member
'Arthur an art, airman
and Neutral Member
Issued at Salem, New Jersey. February 7, 1980.