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 duty 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.
The Investigation was held as scheduled, following which, the Carrier dismissed Claimant from service.
After reading the transcript of the investigation and the positions of each party as set forth in the on-property handling, this Board finds that the Carrier has met the substantial evidence criteria clearly establishing Claimant's culpability for the charges assessed.
It has been established that Claimant ?anew the purpose and intent of the Corporate Lodging Card (CLC) yet proceeded to use the card improperly by charging the Carrier for lodgings when he did not perform service on the following day. Specifically, Claimant charged the Carrier lodging for the nights of October 26. November 2, 7, 8, 9 and 10, 1996, even though he did not work the following day,
Claimant also misrepresented himself as a member of another craft to gain lodging at a facility that did not accept the CLC, and when asked by his Supervisor, he denied the misrepresentation. Claimant finally admitted his act only after he was face-to-face with the motel clerk.
Clearly, Claimant has attempted to defraud the Carrier, which is a serious violation of and by itself, and when one reviews the disciplinary record of Claimant prior to this incident since he established seniority on September 9, 1995, the dismissal is not deemed arbitrary, capricious nor an abuse of Carrier's authority
OROFR
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an award