(Brotherhood
of Maintenance of Way Employes
eARTIES
z~py~eu.Ils:
(The Burlington Northam Santa Fe Railroad
$TATEMENT
.DF CLAIM:
1. The Carrier violated the Agreement when on June 29, 1999, the
Carrier issued a dismissal from employment to Mr. TA.
Robertson for the alleged violation of Rule 1.16, Maintenance of
Way Operating Rules, effective January 31, 1999, in connection
with his alleged absence without proper authority on May 17,
1999.
2. As a consequence of the Carrier's violation referred to above,
Claimant shall be reinstated to his former position with seniority,
vacation, all rights unimpaired and compensated for all wage
loss anfor (sic) otherwise made whole beginning June 15, 1999,
continuing forward.
FINDINGS
Upon the whole record and all the evidence, the Board finds that the parties
herein are carrier and employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as
amended. Further, the Board is duly constituted by Agreement, has jurisdiction of
the Parties and of the subject matter, and the Parties to this dispute were given due
notice of the hearing thereon.
Claimant commenced service April 22, 1996. On April 8, 1999, he was absent
without authority. He waived his rights to a hearing, accepted a 30 day suspension
that was, In accordance with the discipline letter, to commence April 17 with the
advice that he would, "be reinstated to service on May 17, 1999." -
Page 2 pLl3 IJQ
. 5
Award No. l3-1
Caw No. 132
Suffice to say, Claimant did not report for work on the 17th.
When he reported
on the 18th, he was suspended from service pending the results of an Investigation,
following which he was dismissed from service.
A review of the transcript reveals that Claimant did, on the 14th in the
afternoon, contact the Assignment Clerk and exercised seniority to the position he
held when he was suspended. However, he advised the Assignment Clerk that he
could not work on the i7th as he had to be in court on that date. He would be taking
a floating vacation day.
Claimant admitted that he knew the Assignment Clerk had no authority to
mark anyone off, and he also admitted that if he had a need to be off he had to
contact his Supervisor and get his permission.
Claimant's record since his hire date of April, 1996, is far from good. This is
his fourth disciplinary action for being absent without authority, and perhaps the
dismissal should be sanctioned by this Board, but it is known that Carrier Is
experiencing a shortage of Foremen, and since his hiring date he committed only
one violation that was directly related with his work. This Board will reinstate
Claimant's full seniority rights and return him to service, but with no pay for time
lost. This is done on a last chance basis. One more incident of absence without
authority could in all probability lead to a permanent separation from Carrier's
service.
Award No,
13 2 -
Case No. 132
Page 3
AWARD
Claim sustained in accordance with the Findings.
ORDE
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders
that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made. The Carrier is ordered to
make the award effective on or before 30 days following the date the award is
adopted.
/4~j~k
gt-d*W
Robert L. Hicks, Chairman i4 Neutral Member
---~
L~
L'IK' ,
Rick B. Wehril, Labor Member
Dated:AC"}a.,. ..7i 155`1
Xmas M. Rohling, Car Member