PUBLIC
L.A
Iv BO .-t RD - NO. 5418
Case No. 17 Award No. 77
PARTIES
Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
to - and -
DISPU7L
:·
Springfield Teruunal Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
:
(a) Carrier's dismissal of Claimant D. Osier
WfIS
without
justification, was arbitrary and capricious and was a
violation of the current and governing agreement.
(b) Claimant Osier should now be reinstated to the Carrier's
service with all seniority unimpaired and be compensated
_ for all lost wages and benefits lost due to the unjustifcd
termination.
FINDINGS
:
The issue herein came about because of the claimant's failure to provide a clean
urine sample on April 21, 1995, in connection with his call back to service
The record shows claimant was in the process of returning to service and was required to
take a return-to-work physical examination which included a drug screen. On May 1, 1995, the
Carrier was notified that claimant's test results were positive for cannabinoids. On May 2, 1995,
claimant was given a notice to attend a hearing in connection with him testing positive for drugs
on his drug/alcohol screening.
At the May 25, 1995 hearing, claimant's test results were introduced into evidence which
conclusively showed that he tested positive for cannabinoids. During the hearing, claimant
testified that he was notified of the test results and took no exceptions to what the physician had
said regarding the positive results. Further, claimant also testified that he was aware of Carrier's
policy requiring a drug and alcohol screen as part of a return-to-work physical. In addition,
claimant also admitted to a long-standing problem with alcohol to which he contends he is now
AwD
ND.
1-7
PLB No. 5418 C-17/A-17
Page 2
addressing.
Suffice to say that given the established facts of this case, the Board does not find any
support to the Organization's contentions in this case.
Hence, based on the above facts, claimant clearly failed to comply with the requirements
for returning to work and was fully aware of the consequences for his non-compliance.
Therefore, in consideration of the seriousness of the proven offense, we have no proper basis to
disturb the Carrier's decision in this case.
AWARD
:
The claim is denied.
David F. Sibley
Carrier Member
Dated:
//-_r-
Fra~Domzi
NL
Mcmb~l~i
Bradley A. Winter
Organization Member