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 emended. 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.
Claimant was scheduled to work October 9, but he did not report at 0630, the starting time of his assignment, nor did he advise anyone In authority until 1430 that he would not be in to work.
Claimant, In his defense, attempted to convince the Carrier that he had made an all-out effort to obtain his Supervisors number so that he could advise of his necessity to be off. He tried an old call phone number he had rocorded In his planner. He tried to look up his
AS ,/0 _ 0Supervisor's numbor in the phone book, but It was unlisted. On the morning of the ninth, he tried to find his Supervisor's number by calling the manpower offce, but all he got was a recording stating they were on the phone or away from the desk. He Indicated It was not until the afternoon that he reached someone in that office who gave him a phone number for the Supervlsor, and he then Immediately called advising he would not be in.
During the Investigation, it was established that the Supervisor gave each crew member his business card with all possible contact numbers listed, Claimant admitted receipt of the card, but Indicated he lost his wallet with the card In It. He did not try to obtain another because until he went to took for the card, he realized it was In his wallet.
Claimant's defense does not convince this Board that he was trying as hard to reach his Supervisor on the evening of the eighth or the morning of the ninth as he would like this Board to believe.
He know he was to report at 0630 hours at the Ramada Inn In Burlington, Iowa. This Board wonders why he did not try to call the motel and leave a message with his Foreman or the Supervisor any time during the evening of October 8 or early in the morning before 0630.
Claimant failed in his obligation to advise his Supervisor of his unavailability to work at 0630 hours on October 9 until 1430. The discipline of five days deferred is relatively light. It will not be disturbed, particuizrly because of two previous entries In his work record accumulated since he commenced service on August 6, 1996.
ORDE
This Board, after considaration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an