(Brotherhood of Uairtknance of Way Eanployes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (Former (ATSF Railway Company)

STATEMENT OF CLAIM:















to Rule 13 and Appendix 11 because the Carrier did not Introduce
substantial, credible evidence that proved the Claknant violated the
rules anumerated In their decision.
FINOI
Upon the whole record and ad 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 wers given due notice of

the hearing thereon.
The Carrier has an Agreement with the Employees that provides for a termination of services when an Individual is absent without authority in excess of five working days.
Page 2 Award No.


      Claimant was scheduled to work commencing October 13, 2003, but did not show,


nor did he seek permission from anyone In authority.

      A letter of understanding dated July 13, 1976, reads as follows:


      "In connection with the application of (Rule 13) of the current Agreement, this will confirm our understanding reached In conference today that, effective October 1, 1976, to terminate the employment of an employee who is absent from duty without authority, the Company shall address, by Registered or Certified Mall, return receipt requested, with copy to the General Chairman, notifying him that his seniority and employment have been terminated due to his being absent without proper authority and that he may, within 20 days of the date of such notice, if he desires, request that he be given an investigation under (Rule 13) the current Agreement


              NOTE: Effective January 1, 1984, the above understanding is to be applied only in cases where the employee is absent from duty without authority more than five (6) consecutive work days."


              Claimant timely exercised his right to an Investigation. At the Investigation,


Claimant was not able to establish that Carrier was In error.

      It is the opinion of this Board that Carrier's actions were proper pursuant to the


1976 letter of understanding as amended. The request for reinstatement and pay for ttrne

lost is denied.

                          AWARD


      Claim denied.

                          ORDER


This Board, after consideration of the dispute Identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.

              Robert L Nicks, Chairman d Neutral Member


      1-7


Rick B. Wehrll, Labor Member William L. eck, ' r mbar
Dated: