Org. Pile: D-WAGNER Case No.
8
Carrier File: 1-00429 Award No. 8
PUBLIC BOARD NO. 5721
PARTIES Soo Line Railroad Company
TO and
DISPUTE: Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Request on behalf of Milwaukee District Engineer J. E.
Wagner for all time lost and that his record be cleansed of any reference in connection with
his thirty (30) day actual suspension for alleged excessive absenteeism."
STATEMENT OF FACTS: On December 13, 1994, the Carrier sent the following notice
to the Claimant:
"Formal investigation/hearing will be conducted at 10:00 a.m., Tuesday,
December 20, 1994, in the office of the Asst. Division ManagerTransportation, Bensenville, Illinois, for the purpose of establishing cause and
determining responsibility, if any, in connection with your alleged excessive
absenteeism from the period of September 28, 1994, to the present time while
employed as an Engineer for the Soo Line Railroad Company.
"You are entitled to have a representative of your choice present at this
investigation/hearing as is provided for in your schedule rules.
"The facts and circumstances developed in the hearing may be used to
determine the locomotive engineer's certification status.
"If there are any other witnesses that you wish to have appear, other than
those listed below, arrange for their presence at the appointed time and place.
"Please arrange to be present on the date and at the time specified."
FINDINGS: This Board, upon the whole record and all of the evidence, fords that the
Employees and Carrier involved in this dispute arc respectively Employees and Carrier
within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as amended and that the Board has jurisdiction
over the dispute involved herein. _
Case No. 8
Award No. 8
Page 2
OPINION OF THE BOARD: The Claimant, who is also the Local Chairman, defends
much of his absenteeism on the basis that Union business necessitated his absences. The
Board fully recognizes this well-established and very important right. Indeed, nothing in this
award should be interpreted as diminishing the right of a local chairman to layoff his
assignment when the legitimate demands of his Union office require it. Surely this right
should be liberally interpreted.
Nonetheless, it is clear under the facts and circumstances of this unique case that the
Claimant has abused the privilege. The extent of his absences, along with the fact he flatly
refused to elaborate on the necessity to be gone, convinces us of that.
Accordingly and without setting a precedent, the discipline was justified.
AWARD
The claim is denied.
Gil Vernon, Chairman and
Neutral Member
Jim McCoy
Organization Member
Larry E. Nooye
Carrier Member
Dated this 1 ~ay of October, 1997.