." orm 1
.'age 2
Award No. 6623
Docket No. 6517
2-SOU-CM-' 74
Employes contend that the Carrier has not met the burden of proof required
to a finding of guilt as charged. Claimant carried out all instructions given him
by his foreman. If an air leak existed on rear car 32 at
8:15
P.M., the Claimant
could not have known because he was at the north end of the train while the car was
at the south end of the 113 car train. As for the second charge, Employes say that
the Claimant complied with Bulletin No. 245 when he passed over moving cars. He had
never been instructed not to do so. In any event it was,never enforced.
There is no question that a fair and an impartial investigation was
conducted as prescribed in the :rules. It is so admitted in the record by Claimant
and his representatives.
Claimant was a Car Inspector. On instructions from his Car Foreman he
inspected the air line from the middle of the train to the caboose. Another
Carman inspected the line on the head end of the train. When completed, the air
pressure of the caboose was 35 pounds instead of about 60 pounds before the engine
was coupled to the train. Upon reinspection by another Carman, a broken line was
found at the south end of the 32nd car from the caboose, 25 cars south of Yard Air
No. 6.
Whether or not the C hsimant failed to properly inspect the cars must be
determined by the evidence in the record. There is no question that the Claimant
Cade
the inspection of the south end of the train. There is also no question that a
leak was found on the 32nd car from the caboose. And there is no evidence that the
leak occurred after Claimant's inspection. The overwhelming presumption from all the
evidence in the record is that the Claimant made an improper inspection. The mere
fact that the Claimant was at the north end of the train when the leak was discovered
does not absolve him from the original faulty inspection. There is sufficient substantial evidence in the record to justify the assessment of the penalty. Carrier met the
required burden of proof. It has not been shown that the Carrier acted arbitrarily,
capriciously or unreasonably. .
In view of the established findings to the first charge, it is not necessary
to discuss the second.
Claim denied.
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
A W A R D
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Rosemarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 15th day of January, 1974.
Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award
No. 6624
f~, SECOND DIVISION
Docket No.
6521
2-BN-FO-174
The Second
Division
consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee David Dolnick when award was rendered.
( System Federation No. 7, Railway Employes'
( Department, A. F. of L. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Firemen & Oilers)
(
( Burlington Northern, Inc.
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. The Burlington Northern, Inc., unjustly, improperly, and without
supporting their position, suspended Mr. R. L. Stewart from service
five days commencing January
28, 1972,
to and including February 1,
1972.
2.
That accordingly the Burlington Northern, Inc., be ordered to make
R. L. Stewart whole, compensating him for all time lost, and removing
all entries from his personal record referring to this incident.
Findings:
The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and
gall
the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this
dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railway
Labor Act as approved June
21,
1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to-said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
This claim arose out of the same incident as the one in Award No.
6620
This Claimant was also suspended for five (5) days for the same reason. There was
a single investigation for both Claimants. The evidence in the record is identical.
For the reasons stated in Award No. 6620, the instant claim should be
sustained.
A WA R D
Claim sustained.'
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
---.Form 1
Page 2
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
~f~YLx'tL'.iL
-C·,, , `~) I~,~y..'_-C!
Ro emarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 15th day of January, 1974.
Award No. 6624
Docket No. ~6521
2 -BN-FO-' 74