NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD

PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0. 3689


BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES

and

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY


AWARD N0. 10 .

Case No. 10





Brotherhood that the Carrier's action in asses
 ' sing California Division Employe Mr. 3. B.
 Bondurant's personal record with thirty (30)
 demerits was without just and sufficient cause
 and in violation of the Agreement.



As a procedural matter, the Organizaton argues that the Carrier is in violation of Rule 48(f) in that the Carrier did not provide a copy of the transcript of the investigative hearing "promptly" to appropriate Organizaton representatives. Rule 48(f) reads as follows:
                                  PLB No. 3689

                                  Award No. ILI

                                  Page =


      A copy of the transcript of the hearing will be promptly furnished the employee charged, his representative(s) and the General Chairman.


The hearing was conducted on February 8, 1985. The Carrier states that it mailed transcript copies on February 26, March 1 and March 28, 1985 to the appropriate Or8anizaLion representatives. While there may have been some mixup in the mailing and/or receipt of the transcripts, such were in fact received in sufficient time for the Organization to initiate the claim procedure in reference to the disciplinary action taken against the Claimant. Based on this, the Board need not review further the meaning of "promptly" in this connection. There is no dispute as to the facts in this matter. Following an investigative hearing, Claimant was assessed 30 demerits based on his "leaving work early on Wednesday, January 9, 1985, without having notified proper authority". While returning to his tie-up point with two fellow employees in a Carrier vehicle, the Claimant left the vehicle at 3:15 p.m. at a location other than the tie-up point. He was scheduled to be at work for the Carrier until 3:30 p.m.' He stated during the investigative hearing that he did not have authority to fail to complete his tour of duty.
                                    PLB No. 3689

                                    Award No. 1ll

                                    Page 3


The record shows that the Claimant adjusted his time record so that he was not paid for the remaining 15 minutes. Whether he made the adjustment before or after learning of an impending hearing on the matter is uncertain. In any event, this does not offer any justification for his early departure.
 The degree of penalty is fully supported by the Claimant's disciplinary record, which includes a dismissal and subsequentreturn to service on a leniency basis less than three months previous to the incident here under review.

                      A W A R b


      Claim denied.


      HERBERT L. MARX, JR., Chairman and Neutral Member


                E.R. MYERS, Carrier Member


                C.F. FOOSE, Employee Member


New York, N. Y. DATED: December 17, 1985