~°`M, Fore 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 6734


          The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Louis Yagoda when award was rendered.


                      ( System Federation No. 6, Railway Employee'

                      ( Department, A. F. of L. - C. I. 0.

        Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)

        ( _

        ( Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway Company


        Dispute : Claim of Emgloyes:


              (a) The Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway Company, hereinafter referred to as the Carrier, violated Rule 35 of the current working Agreement when Carman Willie Johnson, hereinafter referred to as the Claimant, was withheld from service for a period of two (2) working days.


              This action by the Carrier was unjust, unfair, unreasonable, arbitrary, and capricious, and an abuse of managerial discretion.


    .,, (b) Carrier be ordered to pay Claimant eight ( 8) hours pay at

              the pro rata rate for each of the two (2) days he was

              suspended from service, April 18 and 19, 1972.


        Findings:


        The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:-


          The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in

        . this dispute are respectively carrier and employs within the weaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved Jane 2I, 1934.


        This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.


        Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance a t hearing thereon.


        Employee contend that Claimant was deprived of his rights under Rule 35 by the absence of a precise charge in the letter summoning his to investigation. Said letter stated, in pertinent part:


              "This investigation is being held to develop all facts and determine your responsibility, if any, in connection

- with the personal injury you sustained on March 15, 1972
              at approximately 8:45 a.m. in the Steel Car Shop."

Form 1 Award No.. 6734
 Page 2 Docket No. 6468
                                        2-EJ&E-CM-' 74 _


It has been well-settled by many awards that a notice of this kind is explicit enough to satisfyvthe Rule 35 requirement that the employe under investigation "be apprised of the precise charge against him".

 The incident which led to reposition of the subject penalty occurred while Claimant was in the process of procuring an "tend sheet" for a box car from a stack of material. Whiles doing so, he was struck on the right hand by material falling from this-pile, resulting in a personal injury to himself. '

 We find, from the record, that Carrier acted on substantial and material grounds in concluding that (a) it was or should have been clearly apparent to Claimant that he was dealing with a stack in dangerous disbalance, (b) Claimant's actions in nevertheless attempting to climb it put the stack into further disequilibrium and (c) in view of all this, when Claimant stationed himself beside it for his further efforts, he failed to take reasonable precaution to put himself out of the way of the potential spill which he should have taken into account as a distinct possibility and which resulted in the injury to him.

    The penalty is not excessive.


                      A WA R D


    Claim denied.


                        NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                        By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

                C


;4semnrie Brasch - Xd®inistrative Assistant

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 17th day of July, 1974.