PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 3445
Award Number: 1
Case Number: 1
PARTIES TO DISPUTE
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES
And
SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
Track Repairman, R.G. Jackson, Route 5, Claover, South Carolina, 29710,
was dismissed from service for allegedly misusing a Southern Railway credit card
on December 14, 1981. Employee request pay for
time lost with vacation rights
and seniority rights unimpaired.
FINDINGS
By letter dated December 17, 1981, Claimant was notified that he was
being charged with misuse of a Southern Railway vehicle credit card placed in
his care. A hearing was held in order to investigate the charges on December
22, 1981. On the basis of the evidence adduced during the investigation, Carrier
determined that Claimant had in fact misused the credit card, and that he should
be dismissed. The Organization filed a claim protesting Carrier's action and
requesting that Claimant be returned to service with pay for time lost and
seniority and all other rights unimpaired. The claim was denied at all levels of
appeal on the property, and the Organization then submitted the matter to this
,.
Award No. 1 --~
Case No. 1
Hoard for resolution.
The issue to be decided in this dispute is whether Claimant was dismissed
for just cause; and if not, what should the remedy be.
The record shows that at the time of the investigation, Claimant was
assigned Carrier vehicle Number 80574, a two-ion stake truck with a welding rig
and other repair equipment attached. Claimant was also assigned a Southern
Railway credit card for the purpose of purchasing fuel for that vehicle. At the
investigation, Claimant admitted using the Southern Railway credit card to
purchase $45.75 worth of gasoline for his personal vehicle, a two-tone beige
pickup truck. Claimant also testified that he understood the Southern Railway
credit card was to be used only for the purchase of fuel for the Carrier vehicle
assigned to him.
The Organization argues that the penalty of dismissal was overly harsh
since Claimant was honest throughout the investigation and had a good work
record prior to this incident.
This Board cannot overturn the discipline imposed by Carrier absent a
showing that Carrier's action constituted an abuse of discretion. Concerning
Claimant's work record, it is well established that dismissal is proper for an
-a-
Award No. 1
Case No. 1
offense involving dishonesty,, even if it is the culpable employee's first offense
of any kind. Claimant's hxesty during the investigation constitutes a mitigating
circumstance, but it does not warrant modification of the discipline imposed.
Carrier is not obligated to retain an employee in service who has proven himself
untrustworthy.
For the reasons stated above, it is the opinion of this Board that the
decision to dismiss Claimant was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of
Carrier's managerial discretion. Accordingly, the claim must be denied.
AWARD
Claim denied.
Neutral Member
Carrier Member
Orga ization Member
DATE:
~~i.
Z-J
~~ _ _ __r-
-
-3-