BEFORE SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 924
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES
and
CHICAGO & NORTH WESTERN TRANSPORTATION COMPANY
Case No. 178
Award No.
1
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the
Brotherhood that:
1. The dismissal of Boom Truck Operator J. E.
Ostrander for alleged misuse of Company time,
falsification of work reports and having an
unauthorized person in the boom truck was without
just and sufficient cause, without support,
excessive and capricious (Organization File 6LF
2338D; Carrier File 81-90-49).
2. The Claimant shall have his record cleared of
this incident and made whole for all loss of work
opportunity as provided in Rule 19 of the
Agreement.
FINDINGS:
Claimant J. E. Ostrander was employed by the Carrier as a
machine operator at Chadron, Nebraska.
On November 21, 1989, the Carrier notified the Claimant to
appear for a formal investigation in connection with the
following charges:
a) Misuse of Company time;
b) Falsification of work reports; above items are
for November 6, 7, 8, 1989; and
c) Having an unauthorized person in the boom truck
on November 8, 1989.
The above information was received in the
Engineering Department on November 21, 1989.
After one postponement, the hearing took place on December
6, 1989. On December 13, 1989, the Claimant was dismissed
effective that date. The organization filed a claim seeking the
Claimant's reinstatement to the service of the Carrier, along
I~wd ~5g -
San
9,~ y
with compensation for all time lost. The Carrier denied the
claim.
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 on November 6, 7, and 8, 1989, the
Claimant was guilty of violating Rules 601, 604, and 610. The
record is clear that the Claimant was not devoting himself
exclusively to the Carrier's service while he was on duty, and he
was engaged in all types of wrongful activities rather than
performing the work which he was required to do. Moreover, this
Board finds that the Claimant was guilty of falsifying company
work reports by stating that he had performed work when in fact
he had been merely "goofing around."
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 recognizes that this Claimant had served more
than sixteen years prior to his dismissal. However, in those
sixteen years, the record reveals that the Claimant had received
several deferred suspensions, as well as two actual suspensions,
for a variety of offenses. Given the serious nature of the
2
I~1 wd I58-SBI9 9070
f
offenses herein, as well as the employment record of the
Claimant, which includes a number of reprimands in addition to
the disciplinary actions, this Board cannot find that the action
taken by the Carrier in this case was unreasonable, arbitrary, or
capricious. Therefore, the claim will be denied.
AWARD:
Claim denied.
PETER R fit RS
Neutral Memb r
tvv l~- i vv
L[/////
arrier Member anization b
149
3