3r=~" ac,>2r of ArJrs-4-'PZ'wr ac. 924

. .. ,7A-d two. 57

Oocaet No. 66

p.aRPTRS: br,-.t crl-ocd ofsi~:`eha~cs tQf !·i)? Z.Vulryoae
^s4 s
D1s~UT Lf,~.:'.~.8?1J-'^ ^I!'1 !T-rth 7se°.^-`?rn Tn?r9-ocrtscttZCn ror"LlanY

.·'_.1.-.'.. ·'le`' [^ '.~`.F.'.IT.''~ "Claim Of ·`.a a SYS"Ll C --1-v?'ee ?~ t'- ~rntt-Lr
hc-c theta

(L) The tan (1;'.) day sUspe _=i^n nr^P..-rsd Track ysn s.

Diamond for a? 1 PAFdiy be :rg E,b.^_e.^.t :>r. vv:a,P 2^, t_^nts

visa without just Md SAfrlcient oftuae anc unrF=Tf:.^_t~:d.

(Crajiziz..tlon File 1;.i%-x.5`93 Carrier. File °i_°t._22,·-D) .

(2) ClalWSnt R. A. Dis=nd .^-_ha'-1 be ^?loued the remedy prercribed in Rule 19(d)."

~~J11Y~T.11

This B·~ard, upon the whole re«ord --tnd all tie evidence, finds and holds th.^.t the emvloyes and the Carrier inv^.:-ed, are . resveottvely emsloyes and Carrier within- the, meaLZ=na of the Ral1wey yabor .1ct as amended, and that the Board has Jarisdi^tion over the dispute heroin.

Clalmant, with mbout nine years of service, eras e=loped by the Carrier as n trackman and was Marking as such on th,- xeei:end gang in r^=ncil Bluff, Iowa* ·:ader Foreman au!en ?Partinez. The record s ows that on May 20, l9°!#, c7 aiment did nr t report for work, nor did he receive proper nuttority to absent himself. On play 25, 173h. cl.4tmpnr ira ins'sucted to =spear for a herarirng scheduled for 11.00 A.Y., May 3^, 19°4, en the eh¢rae:

"Your respens.'1bility in connection -ith ec,sentine yourself fro. your r,ork ae, ignsen t t^irhou t suthcr!_ty on Sunday. liar 20, 19$4."

The hearing wee postponed. &^.d cindnetad on June 8, 1984.. A copy of tH= transcript of the hearing hat" teen made a pert of the record. Clai.~ant was present throughout the hearing, was represented, Had presented a witne=a in '--is b-half. FnreTrn Martinez.

In the hearing claimant etntad th^,t he eras absent on may 20, 1a$4-; that he did not contact the 3-.adaasrer or theAaslr-tant Aoudmaster: that he e`t-meted to call fn, beginning about 6:u5 A.M. sndoontinuing until about 7:30 A.A. to contact someone in the Roedmsster's office; that he finally got throuA an'contaeted Foreman I?artinez s1hout R:00 A.M.. or $05; that he intended to report lair, due to o.^.r trouble -

SBA-924 Award No. 5't

D -~"^etAo. 66

a flat tire on his truck and the spare was at a service st"ation. He stated that In his conversation with Martinez he was informed thst Vie Assistant 3-cdmaater "was going to write me up," and that he then infcrm-d ilartinez ttct "I wasn't feel4'.ng too s·:ell I just M'trht as well stray at -ome. Liart iaez t°sttfied that claimAnt toad talked to him about 8:00 A.N; that he told the oTAlaant t::nt the ..^,ssi scant had been there and "they were probably gain? t0 writn Vii: ur;" that yhP :ns:s'.nnt 11osdmast_-r :Jas riot ?t th-1 t`)Ol h:^·a.3:°. ~,' the' tips hct he tvlted t.7 claimant, anti that his r.^sncnaae t'.7 cla1:7nI1t vbo'7t beinn writ-.:,n up was i):S oH!! oDininn, and ~:h~·t he did not advise tho ·tssistant ~oa:;ba~te_ about ':?s c-~nv::::,~i:i,,a .Yith claimant.

Tho Assistant 11aadmaster indicated there were several loeattons where he could hrvn been on the morning of Hay 20, 1994. Hetnstified:

" ....for w·?eICend duty = ,Just show ap at the Fremont tool h.iusm, the Blair Roaclmaster' a office, or C ,~uncii Bluffs,: as 1 did that W<·^kead.'

If the 2nadmaster or the Assistant Roadmaster we're the only ones xtth authority to permit an ez;;aloye to be late or absent, it would appear only pr.oer that such persons wculd have' fixed locations to receive calls. As stated In National Railroad Adjustment, Third Division Award No. 23039:

"While the rule clearly requires an employe to obtain authority prbr to being absent, it also obligates his supervisor to be available to receive such requests."

We agree with the statement of the Organization In the appeal on the property:

"The transcript shows that the Carrier expects their employes to call all over the property in order to be e7eused from duty. This expectation is totally unrealistic and unreasonable."

Also, in the hearing the Aspistent Roadmaster stated:

";Jell, car problems are not valid reasons to miss work."

Such position has aiso been rejected. In Third Division`nward Bo. 20198 it was held:

"...In the absence of a clear showing of alternate transportation to work, it could not reasonably be said that oar trouble is not good cause for a one-day

SBA-92G

award No. 57 Pockel No. 66 rage

"absence from work. The role of the rctcm^tile In~l=-merlosn work life is too well xnoa:n to re7sire c.iecursicn.

Sae al.~o Thin' Divieiort A-'-rd ?To. _74571' end Ars^e No. 181 of Fublic,Law nomrd No. 1582.

If the disput-- herein lnvclvcad c nly the_ mnt%er of c;9nimrnt being l9tP fnr r r-n=onnbletime dne to car trouble, we w^uld have an entirely different eituntion, and- posr.ibly a difrerent result, but claimvnt, cf his oars rolition, remained off free work the entire day after 2or"sn Martinez m~ntlcncd to him the vcssibtlity of his beinm written up* B13 response that `I wasntt feeling too well I mim!?t just as well 3::ay at riome," was, no do:-bta simply a knee-jerk reaction to what the foreman had told him. The claimant has shown no justification for being absent the entire dny. He was subject to discipline for his action in this respect. The t?nday suspension was. not arbitrary, capricious or ;.n bpd fnith. The alai: will be de..-ied.

A W A n Claim denied.

::·c¢i'rnan, `aeutrni i'anber

Ce. ri~ tbe-2' Labor Member

DATMI QS'C7'

~7CV e