BEFORE SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 1037
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES
and
CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.
Case No. 26
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Dismissal of A. T. Cooper, ID No. 14775, as a
result of investigation held March 18, 1991, at
Tampa, Florida.
FINDINGS:
Claimant A. T. Cooper was employed by the Carrier as a
section foreman.
On March 7, 1991, the Carrier notified the Claimant that he
was being held out of service effective that date in connection
with the following charge:
You are hereby charged with conduct unbecoming an
employee.
On March 7, 1991, at approximately 3:00 p.m., I
observed you pumping gas into Red Griffis' personal
car. He is a Welder for Roadmaster McAllister in
Lake City. This was done at the Shell Station at
corner of US-301 and US-100, Starke, Florida. The
gas was being pumped from the same pump you used to
fill Section Truck 75515.
On March 13, 1991, the Carrier notified the Claimant that he
was to attend a formal investigation into the charges against him
on March 18, 1991. The hearing was held on that date; and on
April 5, 1991, the Carrier dimissed the Claimant from service on
account that he had been found guilty of the charges against him.
The organization thereafter filed a claim on the Claimant's
behalf, challenging his dismissal.
.S(3/-I l03"7
CO-6e
a6
The parties being unable to resolve the issues, this matter
came before this Board.
This Board has reviewed the evidence and testimony in this
case, and we find that there is sufficient evidence in the record
to support the finding that the Claimant was guilty of conduct
unbecoming an employee when on March 7, 1991, he pumped gas into
another employee's personal car, said gas to be paid for by the
Carrier. The Claimant was required to fill the Carrier truck
with the gasoline at the Shell Station and, instead, put gas from
the pump into another employee's personal car. That type of
conduct is clearly unbecoming an employee and amounts to theft
from the Carrier.
Once this Board has determined that there is sufficient
evidence in the record to support the guilty finding, we next
turn our attention to the type of discipline imposed. This Board
will not set aside a Carrier's imposition of discipline unless we
find its action to have been unreasonable, arbitrary, or
capricious.
This Board has held on numerous occasions that theft from
the Carrier is a sufficient basis upon which to terminate one's
employment. This Board has reviewed the personnel record of the
Claimant, which indicates that he has previously been terminated
for rule violations and later reinstated: Moreover, he has
received several suspensions, demerits, letters of caution, and
reprimands. Given that previous record and the seriousness of
the offense of which the Claimant was found guilty, this Board
has no choice other than to deny the claim.
2
5C3R io,37
- CQ,.sL°
0'2(0
AWARD:
Claim denied.
PETER R. PYERS
Neutral Member
Carrier Member Organization Member
Date:
3