PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 6302
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES )
Case No. 72
and )
Award No. 71
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY )
Martin H. Malin, Chairman & Neutral Member
D. D. Bartholomay, Employee Member
D. A. Ring, Carrier Member
Hearing Date: February 16, 2005
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
1. The dismissal of Foreman J. P. Beach for his alleged dishonesty in claiming time
for August 18, 19, 20 and 21, 2003 was without just and sufficient cause and in
violation of the Agreement (System File W-0448-155/1391574D).
2. As a consequence of the violations referred to in Part (1) above, Foreman J. P.
Beach shall now be reinstated to service with seniority and all other rights
unimpaired and compensated for all wage loss suffered.
FINDINGS:
Public Law Board No. 6302, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds
that Employee and Carrier are employee and carrier within the meaning of the Railway Labor
Act, as amended; and, that the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute herein; and, that the parties
to the dispute were given due notice of the hearing thereon and did participate therein.
On September 12, 2003, Carrier notified Claimant to report for a formal investigation on
September 25, 2003, concerning his alleged dishonesty in claiming time for work on August 18,
19, 20 and 21, 2003, that he did not perform. The hearing was postponed to October 28, 2003,
by mutual agreement of Carrier and the Organization. It was postponed again by mutual
agreement to November 18, 2003,and postponed a third time to December 2, 2003. On
December 2, 2003, Claimant did not appear and the hearing proceeded in absentia over the
Organization's objection. On December 19, 2003, Carrier notified Claimant that he had been
found guilty of the charge and dismissed from service.
In Case No. 71, Award No. 70, we denied Claimant's claim concerning his dismissal for
insubordination. In light of our decision in Award No. 70, there is no relief that we could afford
Claimant in the instant case, even if we were to find merit in his claim. Accordingly, we hold
?LB 1030
a
~4wc~ 71
that the instant claim is moot.
AWARD
Claim dismissed.
A
*-
Martin H. Malin, Chairman
D. A. Ring, D. D. artholomay,
Carrier Member Employee Members q- O
Dated at Chicago, Illinois; April 22, 2005
-2-
NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD
PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 6302
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES )
Case No. 72
and )
Award No. 71
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY )
Martin H. Malin, Chairman & Neutral Member
D. D. Bartholomay, Employee Member
D. A. Ring, Carrier Member
Hearing Date: February 16, 2005
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
I. The dismissal of Foreman J. P. Beach for his alleged dishonesty in claiming time
for August 18, 19, 20 and 21, 2003 was without just and sufficient cause and in
violation of the Agreement (System File W-0448-155/1391574D).
2. As a consequence of the violations referred to in Part (1) above, Foreman J. P.
Beach shall now be reinstated to service with seniority and all other rights
unimpaired and compensated for all wage loss suffered.
FINDINGS:
Public Law Board No. 6302, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds
that Employee and Carrier are employee and carrier within the meaning of the Railway Labor
Act, as amended; and, that the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute herein; and, that the parties
to the dispute were given due notice of the hearing thereon and did participate therein.
On September 12, 2003, Carrier notified Claimant to report for a formal investigation on
September 25, 2003, concerning his alleged dishonesty in claiming time for work on August 18,
19, 20 and 21, 2003, that he did not perform. The hearing was postponed to October 28, 2003,
by mutual agreement of Carrier and the Organization. It was postponed again by mutual
agreement to November 18, 2003,and postponed a third time to December 2, 2003. On
December 2, 2003, Claimant did not appear and the hearing proceeded in absentia over the
Organization's objection. On December 19, 2003, Carrier notified Claimant that he had been
found guilty of the charge and dismissed from service.
In Case No. 71, Award No. 70, we denied Claimant's claim concerning his dismissal for
insubordination. In light of our decision in Award No. 70, there is no relief that we could afford
Claimant in the instant case, even if we were to find merit in his claim. Accordingly, we hold
?LB (030
a
that the instant claim is moot.
wc~ '1 I
AWARD
Claim dismissed.
//w/
///- nv/-- -
Martin H. Malin, Chairman
Ilk
.~... '
D. A. Ring, D. D. artholomay,
Carrier Memberm Eployee Members q- O
Dated at Chicago, Illinois; April 22, 2005