SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 957
SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA
TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
"CARRIER"
and
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE
OF WAY EMPLOYEES
"ORGANIZATION"
-------------------------------
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Award No. 14
Claim of the Brotherhood (BMWE-86-29-F12) that:
This dismissal of track General Helper Byron Wood was
without just and sufficient cause and was excessive discipline
particularly in light of the alleged offense.
REMEDY:
The Claimant shall be reinstated without loss of
compensation and without loss of seniority and other contractual
benefits and privileges the Claimant enjoyed prior to his
dismissal.
OPINION OF THE BOARD
Claimant, B. Wood, was discharged on November 3, 1986, for
being AWOL in violation of Work Rule 24. The Organization seeks
his reinstatement without loss of compensation
The arbitration hearing in this matter took place on September
21, 1987. Claimant was present and represented by the organization.
957-
The basic facts are not complex. On October 30, 1986,
Claimant was scheduled to report to work at 3:00 p.m. He did
not appear. Carrier apparently received no message from Claimant,
on that day concerning his absence. Claimant later contended
that he had his wife call on that day to report his absence due
to illness.
The Carrier maintains that as it received no calls concerning
Claimant's absence, he was AWOL and under Carrier rules was properly
discharged. The Organization contends that Carrier has failed
to prove the alleged offense and that Carrier has further failed
to administer discipline with an even hand.
Article IX, Section 903 (Failure to Report to Work) of the
Labor Agreement, cited by the parties, states:
Failure to report for work, without being
excused by SEPTA, shall constitute a cause
for dismissal from employment, but is subject
to the grievance procedure.
Carrier Work rules, cited by the parties, state in relevant
part:
22. Report for Work
Employees, unless excused, must report
and be fully ready for work at the assigned
times, locations areas, etc., in accordance
with the schedules set up in the employees'
particular departments and locations.
28. Sickness
Notice of sickness must be given by the
employee to his/her supervisor (unless specifically
instructed to do otherwise by one's supervisor)
prior to the starting time of one's shift on the
first day of one's intended absence due to sickness ....
_2_
The Board has determined that the claim must be denied.
Carrier Rules clearly obligate employees to give proper notice
of any absence. According to both the contract and Work Rules,
failure to fulfill this obligation subjects an employee to discharge.
The weight of evidence here establishes that Claimant did not
supply proper notification of his absence on October 30. Despite
there being no evidence that Claimant was physically unable to
call the Carrier personally, he did not do so. Although it was
contended that his wife called on
his
behalf, there is no direct
evidence of such a call being placed. Although an employee may
in appropriate circumstances delegate his obligation to contact
the Carrier concerning an absence, the Claimant must here bear
responsibility when the designee did not perform the function
properly. Finally, there exists no mitigating factors justifying
Claimant's reinstatement, as he was a short-term employee with
a poor work record that included one prior occurrence of AWOL
resulting in a suspension with final caution.
AWARD
Claim denied.
R. B. BIRNBRAUER W. E. LaRUE
Carrier Member Organization Member
S. E. BUCHHEIT
Neutral Member