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 was operating a tamper machine in conjunction with several other machines.
Claimant started at 0600 at Needles, California, and moved to Ludlow, California, arriving at 0900 or 0930. Upon arrival at Ludlow, Claimant approached his Foreman and sought permission to make several phone calls. The Foreman agreed and told Claimant that when he was finished, come out to the machine as It required some normal
Page 2 Award No.Claimant, according to the Foreman, after completing the calls, came out to his machine, secured his lunch and walked back to where he allegedly had made his calls.
The Foreman instructed Claimant to work on his machine, tightening some bolts. Claimant stated he had no tools and kept walking towards the building where the phones were located. He responded to the Foreman's instructions that he had no tools, having removed his tool box the day before the machine gang was scheduled to be abolished, either that Friday or the following Monday and the machines were to be left at Ludlow.
It was established that Machine Operators are required to carry a tool kit sufficient to perform minor repairs on the machine they are assigned to. Heavy repairs are done by the field mechanic.
It Is obvious from the testimony that Claimant was set to do nothing after the machines were at Ludlow. Claimant tried to get through to manpower to find where he could bump, but he contends he spent sometime attempting to get through.
Claimant may not have had his tools with him, but he could have borrowed some from the mechanic who was working on other equipment, but he did not When asked about borrowing tools, he countered by stating no one offered him the tools.
What comes through in the investigation is Claimants arrogance. He had no intention of doing any work after they reached Ludlow. In fact, when questioned by a Roadmaster the afternoon of July 2, Claimant allegedly told the Roadmaster that two members of the crew sat in the Ludlow office while he was working and that on July 2, he didthe same thing to them. He sat The Carrier on July 3, 2003, pulled Claimant from service pending the results of the Investigation.
Page s Award No.that argsnmt as in serious cases such as insubordination, srwpensions prior In the wwsedprrdon in such cases are not uawuat. The Board finds such semen did not deprive Clairmont of anp due priphft.
Clsirwnes work record In clean. In ninatean and orw-hall ywars of service, Ibis is the fiat nrsrk in his raeoed, but clean records carnet prolsc! somsom from A charges or tram being diseipiwd, but 0 can lessen the mrerily of the disc(pdrw. in this btatwxs, Clainsnt rtes in violmlon. He was hwubordirala and viorbd the requinnwnt in force for s1 AIadWm Opsrabors and that rapes b Mr fmAn e to ham his toot box on fw job wNit hkm
Cain.nrs dlecipdw Is reduced to thirty days out of am vin. He is !o be paid for amps lost as provided for in the Apmarnent for a5 fines lost to excess of thirty days.
Thi Board, alter corrideraliorr of the diaprRS idenolied above, fwreby aid,"s ant an sward favorable to the Clainrra/s) be nrads. The Caniar is wderad b nwka tfw -wand elf`edw on or before 30 days SmOn-rhrp tM date the sward is adopted.