First Division Award No. 24422 (Mikrut, Jr.) (BLE/Chicago & North Western Trans. Co.)

"Moreover, in addition to the above, regarding Organization's assertion(s) that Claimant was not guilty of insubordination as charged, the Board notes that in order to be found guilty of insubordination, Carrier must give an employee a clear and direct order within its managerial authority; and the employee must be able to carry out said order. Even though Claimant arguably would have complied with Carrier's direct order to report for duty on August 13, 1992, but for his incarceration, arbitral precedent, nonetheless, holds that incarceration is, in fact, a voluntary act; and Claimant, therefore, voluntarily failed to comply with Carrier's direct order."

Third Division Award No. 30994 (Hicks) (BMWE/Union Pacific)

"Claimant, during the appeal attempted to explain that his jailing was not his fault. Carrier did some investigation of its own and said the reason he missed the court date for which the warrant was issued in this case was that he failed to keep the court informed of his whereabouts and his reason for being unavailable."