1. The Carrier violated the current Agreement when the name of Sheila D. White was removed from the seniority rosters when she allegedly failed to return from a leave of absence and failed to request and receive an extension to her leave of absence.

2. As a consequence of the Carrier's violation referred to above, Claimant shall be returned to service, the discipline shall be removed from the Claimant's personal record, and he shall be compensated for all wages lost in accordance with the Agreement.

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 had been granted a leave of absence that expired on September 30, 1998. On December 4, 1998, Carrier wrote Claimant advising that since she had failed to return to service on or before the expiration of her leave of absence, that pursuant to Rule 87 she had forfeited her seniority.

Shortly after the December 4, 1998, letter, the Organization wrote the Carfier seeking an extension to Claimant's leave (which was supported by a statement from Claimant's doctor). The Organization then requested an unjust treatment hearing which was finally held on February 11, 1999. On February 22, 1899, Carrier reaffirmed its position, following the Investigation.

I