PARTIES TO DISPUTE,
 (The Burlington Northam Santa Fs Railroad (Former (ATSF Railway Company) F_TATEMENT OF CWM:







shelf immadiateiy return the Claimant to service with seniority,
 vacation and all other rights unimpaired, remove any mention of this
 incident from Claimant's personal record, and make Ciarnant whole
 for alt tine lost commencing June 7, 2006.
 FINDINGS
 Upon the whole record and ail 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.
 After reading the investigation, the Carrier failed to fumish sufflchnt evidence of Claimant's culpability for the charges assessed.

 A large gang of fifty plus employees were staying at a motet. Someone stalked the five women who were sitting in the hotel lobby.
Page 2 ? L 3 PO. . SSSO Award No.

ended when they refused his request to go to his room and for $20.00 strip for him.

The Carrier, naturally, moved to Investigate the complaint. Each lady positively identifed a snapshot of Claimant as the man who stalked them and concluded the stalk with an offer of money for a striptease.

Five women put in writing the events that led to this Investigation. in Exhibit 3a, the writer stated:


      "1 was in the process of driving away when 1 see a person that works at BNSF try to get Into Jessica car. I know he works at BNSF because i saw him get off the BNSF big white bus that drop off employees at the end of the work day."


Exhibit 3b contained the following:

      "The company employee was walking around in the lobby watching us. We didn't think anything of it at the time. As we were leaving the gas company employee must have followed us out to Jessica's car because as she was letting us into the back (it is a 2 door, and very small) Jessica turned around to lip the seat back Into place to get in the car when the company employee approached us. He seamed to have appeared out of nowhere so he had to have followed us out. Amanda at this time was In the back, I was In the passenger seat, and Jessica was caught in the v of the car door and the employee's body. He then asked If we would like to come to his room and strip for him. He offered to pay us. Jessica said we weren't interested at ail. At that time he left, Jessica got Into the car and we left"


Exhibit 3c stated:

      "After Amanda got in the car I looked up and theta stood the employee. He stsppsd forward and asked ff we were going horns. i answered with yea. He responded with 'i am looking for some girls to do a strip tease for me in my room. i am willing to pay.' i responded whit `we're not interested, not Interested at all."


In Exhibit 3d was the statement:

      "i first notice a man standing In his window of his hotel room that overlooks the lobby. He was staring down at us. When we'll took up at him to where he knew we saw him, he'd took or walked away. Then after a while he came down into the lobby, He was there In lobby, went into the

Page 3 ND . T$6"D Award No.
                                            Case No. 316


    bar, then back into the lobby. He'd go back and forth. You could see everything that goes on In the lobby from the bar.


                        wwxww


He continued to watch us. He walk outside to smoke, come back inside and sit in the chair." With the aforequoted written statements, coupled with an alleged positive identification of Claimant from a photograph, the Carrier established an investigation:

      "...for your alleged Inappropriate behavior and conduct when you allegedly offered money for three women to undress, in your room at the BNSF provided lodging facility.. .^ In reviewing the statements, the letter in Exhibit 3a states:

"I know he works at BNSF because I saw him get off the BNSF big white bus that drop(si off employees at the end of the work day ...." The statement quoted In part Is in doubt before this Board as Claimant stated he never rides the bus. He goes to the worksite and returns via a six passenger van. In Exhibit 3b, the author stated:
 "No asked if we would come to his room and strip for him. He offered to pay us." This was disputed by Claimant as he had no money and, In fact, wired home for some money so he could go home on his off days. The Exhibit 3c statement eat forth the alleged proposition as set forth in Exhibit 3b, and for the same reason that the statement In 3b was rejected by this Board is that Claimant established that at the time he had no money. In Exhibit 3d, the author of the statement speaks of Claimant looking down at them from a room on the second floor that had a window looking down at the lobby. Clalmanfs room had a window looking down on the roar parking Iot No effort
 Page 4 j L $ pay . 5 °v Sb Award No.
                                            Case No. 315


was made to determine to whom the room was registered.

Also stated in Exhibit 3d, "He walked outside to smoke." Claimant does not smoke.

In summary, Claimant does not ride the bus to and from the worksite, he does not smoke, he was broke on the daft of the alleged proposition and his room looks over the back parking lot, not the lobby.

As stated, the Carrier did not furnish sufficient evidence to substantiate that Claimant was culpable for the charges set forth in the Investigation. All traces of this Incident am to be removed from his record, and if he lost any money because of this incident, he is to be paid.


Claim sustained.

This Board, after consideration of the dispute Identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) be made. The Carrier Is ordered to make the award effective on or before 30 days following the date the award is adopted.


                        y/ ~Zd-

              Robert 1. Hicks, Chairman & Neutral Member


                            ~Y ? fM7 / 7 Q


David D. Tanner, For the Employees Samantha Rogers, For !~eCarrier

 Dated: ~^, C"kL/ ~J[~