PUBLIC LAW
BOARD NO. 6850
Award No.
Case No. 279
(Brotherhood of Maintenance
of Way
Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE
:
(The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (Former
(ATSF Railway Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
1.The Carrier violated the Agreement on May 19, 2006, when it Issued
the Claimant, Mr. C3. D. Diehl, a 30-day actual suspension for a violation
of Maintenance of Way Operating Rule 1.6 Conduct, for falsification of
expense account receipts.
2. As a consequence
of
the violation referred to in part (1), the Carrier
shelf Wnrnedlately remove any mention of this incident from his
personal record, and make him whole for any wages lost account of
this incident.
FINDIN
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, a Structures Foreman, is reimbursed actual expenses while on the road,
Any single
meat
In excess of $10.00 and any expense reported under the heading of
"Business Entertainment" regardless of the expenditure must be supported by a receipt.
On April 19, 2006, the Carrier notified Claimant of its intent to schedule an
Investigation, which reads as follows:
"Attend investigation In the BNSF Depot, 800 South Main, Carrollton, MO at
1330 hours on Monday, April 25, 2004 for the purpose of ascertaining the
facts and determining your responsibility, If any, for your alleged
dishonesty, when you allegedly falsified your expense account for the
Page 2
rL
s
Na
. S
a $ o
Award No.
Case No. 279
period of March 1, 2005 through March 31, 2006, while assigned as
Structures Foreman."
The investigation was held on April 28, 2006, fotkwving which the Carrier, on May
19, 2005, wrote Claimant that as a result of the Investigation he was being assessed an
actual 30-day suspension from service.
Claimant's Supervisor reviews Claimants expense account and adds his
signature certifying the expense claim. While reviewing Claimant's expense account, he
found three entries under the heading of "Business Entertainment" but no receipts.
Claimant did furnish receipts supposedly covering the business entertainment
entries, but the Supervisor became suspicious of their authenticity, particularly one that
looked Uke It was printed on computer paper and cut to size.
Claimant admitted the three receipts were bogus, but he did contend he spent the
money claimed. However, he could not definitely state where he did spend the money.
The argument advanced was that the money clakned was a little more than
Claimants hourly wage, but fraud is fraud.
Any individual, regardless of seniority and a lily-white disciplinary record, must
suffer the consequences of such acts. Freud, theft of services or outright theft are
serious violations regardless of the monetary amount
AWARD
Claim denied.
ORDER
This Board, after consWeration of the dispute identiflod above, hereby orders hurt
an award favorable to the Ciaiment(s) not be made.
Page 3
P~
a
~a
s
~~ Award No.
Case No. 279
Robert L. Hicks, Chairman & Neutral Member
Rick . Wehrii, Labor Member William L. Yeck, Carrier Me tier
Gated: