Parties Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes


7
      to and

      Dispute Southern Railway Company

      Georgia, Southern and Florida Railway Company

      Statement

      of Claim: Claim on behalf of Former Track Laborer Leon McConnehead

      for reinstatement and pay for all time lost as a result

      of his dismissal on Apri.T 27, 1981 for conduct unbecoming

      art employee and violation of Rule G.

      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 October 17, 1979, that it has jurisdiction of-the

      parties and the subject matter, and that the parties were given due

      notice of the hearing-, heTd-

      Claimant Track Laborer as a result of an on-duty injury which occurred in September of 1980. filed a claim with Carrier's Claim Department.

      He had discussions with said department's Agent located at Valdosta,

      Georgia. Said Agent,_B. C. Hooker, offered-to pay Claimant $1,000.00 in

      disposition of the matter. On Marctr 20, 1981', Claimant accepted such 4

      offer. A release was executed and Claimant was given a draft for

      $1,000.00 from Claim Agent Hooker.

      Apparently, because Claimant's bank advised that it would take a

      few days for said draft to clear he returned to Claim Agent Hooker's

      office and was given are explanation therefor which was to the effect that

      this was the usual way it was done and that it would take a few days to

      clear.

                                ,

      Claimant, orr April 3, 1981, again returned to the Agent's office because the draft had not yet cleared. As a result of his abusive conduct and activities at that time he was subsequently charged with conduct unbecoming. an employee and with violation of 'Carrier's Operating Rule "G."

                                -2- Award No.19 -- 0'55-10


      He was requested to appear at a formal investigation which was held on April 16, 1981. On April. 27, 1981 Claimant was advised of the results of the. investigation, in part, reading as follows: "The investigation record clearly reflects that you did., in fact; threaten Claim Agent Hooker, and further that you were distinctly under the

' influence of alcohol at the time of this
 . occurrence- .

              In this respect, it is quite obvious that you were guilty of conduct unbecoming an employee as well as your violation of our Operating Rule "G." '


              For your responsibility and failure in this respect, along with violation of Operating Rule "G," this is to advise, that you. are dismissed from service..."


      The Board finds that Claimant was. accorded the due process to which entitled under his Agreement Rule (Rule 43)..

      There was sufficient competent, credible and probative evidence adduced at- the investigation- to support Carrier's conclusion as to Claimant°s guilt. Claim Agent Hooker, among other things,, testified that because of Claimant's conduct.he feared for-his safety and that he requested the presence of the police department- In addition, corroborating the evidence of Agent Hooker was Carrier witness, Mr. Sam Register of the GeorgiaeState Health Department, who occupied the adjacent office.

      The Board in the circumstances, in light of the offense and

      Claimant's record, finds that the discipline assessed was reasonable.

      This-claim will be denied.

      Awards CTairtr decried.


      `

        ,fa, Employee Member Rarrier Member


                .soC 2 ~~ ·~Ir

                Arthur T. an Wart,al nnan.

                  and Neutral Member


                  Issued April 19, 1983.