PUBLIC UAW BOARD NO. 5850
Award No.
Case No. 320
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employs*
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (Former
(ATSF Railway Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
1. The Carrier violated the Agreement when Claimant, J.A. McLellan
(1485880) was dismissed for absent without proper for more than
five (5) consecutive work days The Carrier failed to recognize the
extreme circumstances of the Claimant's personal life. This Is
extreme, unwarranted and unjustified punishment and a flagrant
abuse of Carrier rules. The Claimant should be reinstated with
seniority, vacation, ail rights unimpaired and pay for all wage loss
commencing October 12, 2007, continuing forwardlor otherwise
made whole.
2. As a consequence of the violation referred to in part 1 the Carrier
shall immediately correct the Claimant's discipline record and make
Claimant whole for all time lost.
FjNpjNGS
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 11 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 absent from work commencing September 26, 2007, and forward for
nine consecutive workdays.
Pursuant to an Agreement, employees on unauthorized absences for more than
five consecutive workdays are advised they are terminated from service. N the employee
Page 2 Award No.
Case No. 320
wishes to dispute Carrier's findings or wants to present a valid reason as to why he was
absent, they do have the right to request a hearing (which actually is an unjust treatment
hearing) if the request is made within 20 days of the date of the termination letter.
This was done. At the Investigation, Claimant set forth his reason for being
unable to contact his Foreman or the office of manpower. He had the phone number but
he could not get to a phone, and in fact, could not leave the house.
In unjust treatment hearings, the burden of proof shifts from the shoulder of the
Carrier to the shoulder of the Claimant.
Claimant presents a rather unusual reason why he was unable to contact anyone
of the Carrier to seek authorization to be off. However, the basics of this incident are
clearly defined by Claimant himself. The Agreement is clear. The termination from
service Is in accordance with an Agreement that exists on this Carrier with this
Organization. The Board cannot grant leniency or reduce the termination.
AWARD
Claim denied.
ORDER
This Board, after consideration of the dispute Identified above, hereby orders that
an award favorable to the Cialmant(s) not be made.
Robert L. Hicks, Chairman & Neutral Member
David D. Tanner, For the Employees Samantha Rogers, For Carrier
Dated: