AWARD N0. 269
Case No. 357
PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0. 912
PARTIES) NORFOLK AND WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY
TO
DISPUTE) UNITED TRANSPORTATION UNION (C&T).
STATEMENT OF
CLAIM:
Claim of St. Louis Switchman J. G. Cann, Sr.
who
was ismi~sse from service of the Norfolk and Western Railway
Company on January 9, 1975, requesting claimant be. reinstated with
all seniority rights and privileges restored, and compensated for
all time lost, charged with allegedly showing fraud, due to his
marking of his adverse allowance form.
FINDINGS: This Public Law Board No. 912 finds that the parties
herein are Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway
Labor Act, as amended, and. that this Board has jurisdiction.
In this dispute the operations and services on the St.
Louis
Terminal
were consolidated
on June 1, 1972 as.a~result of the merger of
the Norfolk and Western. Article 7 of the Agreement signed on April
22, 1972 provided protection for the employees.
The claimant herein held a regular assignment in the North St. Louis
territory of the St. Louis Terminal prior to the consolidation. Sometime thereafter, due to force reductions, the claimant was furloughed
and was in
the status of a furloughed employee during the period of
January through October; 1974.
By letter dated December 28, 1973 the Superintendent notified the
claimant that Article 7, Section 2 of the April 22, 1972 Consolidation Agreement provided protection for the claimant, and the last
paragraph stated:
"If you are engaged in other employment while not working
as yardman for Norfolk and Western, or on the Norfolk and
Western yardmen's extra list, or working for Norfolk and
Western in some other capacity,, and are claiming a dismissal allowance from Norfolk and Western while not working for Norfolk and Western, you must report your gross
total compensation ,from employment other than with Norfolk
and
Western in
Line 3(b) " .
The claimant submitted monthly claims on the prescribed form but
failed to show any outside earnings
in
the space so provided in
Paragraph 3(b). The Carrier ascertained that the claimant, had employment and had earnings for each month from January through October
of 1974.
Award No. 269
Page 2
The claimant was notified to report to the office of the_Superintendent for a formal investigation. He was charged with his failure
to report the outside earnings and with concealment of the outside
earnings for the Period January through October of 1974 and for his
failure to comply with the provisions of Section 4(c), Article 13 of
the January 27, 1972 Agreement.
The claimant had earnings from $742.00 up to $2151.00 during the
months involved. He reported none of those earnings. The Organization contends that the claimant was a displaced employee and not a
dismissed employee. For the purposes of this decision; it is not
necessary to decide in which category the claimant, was placed. He .
accepted the money from the Carrier. He had been given directions
to report outside earnings and he failed to do so. He accepted the.
money when he was fully aware that he should have reported the outside earnings to the Carrier. There is simply no basis to overrule
the decision of the Carrier.
AWARD: Claim denied.
..
Preston .7:OdorLr, `Chairman
Organization.
Member
Carrier Member
St. Louis, Mo.,
July 7,, 1976