Upon the whole record and all the evidence, after hearing, the Board finds that the parties herein are carrier and employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, and this board is duly constituted by agreement under Public Law 89-456 and has jurisdiction of the parties and subject matter.
This award is based on the facts and circumstances of this particular case and shall not serve as a precedent in any other case.
After thoroughly reviewing and considering the transcript and the parties' presentations, the Board finds that the claim should be disposed of as follows:
Claimant was dismissed for failing to properly report an alleged on-duty injury and for falsifying that injury. Te record reveals that Claimant alleged he was injured on duty on March 30, 1999, but he did not report the alleged injury until April 23, 1999. Moreover, the record further reveals substantial evidence that, when he did report the alleged on-duty injury, the report was false. Thus, we find that Carrier proved the violations with which Claimant was charged.
We further find that the violations were aggravated. The medical reports reflected that Claimant suffered from osteoporosis and arthritis, rather than a discrete on-duty injury to his back. Moreover, Claimant did not claim to have injured his back while on duty until after he had exhausted his vacation days and was to undergo continuing treatment for back problems. Under these circumstances, we cannot say that dismissal was arbitrary, capricious or excessive. Therefore, the claim is denied.