The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Dana E. Eischen when award was rendered.


                    ( System Federation No. 16 (formerly System Federation

                    ( No. 57) Railway Employes' Department, AFL-CIO

      Parties to Disnute: ( (Carmen)


                    ( Norfolk and Western Railway Company


      Dispute: Claim of Employes:


              1. That under the Current Working Agreement Carmn R. Rodriguez was unjustly assessed a thirty (30) day deferred suspension on October 18, 1973, as a result of an investigation held on September 19, 1973.


                2. That the Carrier be ordered to remove: from Carman Rodriguez's service record the thirty (30) day deferred suspension.


      FiY?~l i.t'm~ '


    _1 The Second Division of the Adjustment Brard, 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 employe within tile r-,aaning of the: Railway Labor'Act as approved June 21, 1934.


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


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


. Claimant R. Rodriguez is a carman work inspector on the rip track at
                                                            .

      Calumet Yard in Chicago, Illinois. His responsibilities include marking equipment for repairs and then following up to insure that required repairs are made.


      On August 19, 1973 a car (TTX 478593) came. into Calumet for repairs including removal of couplers a t both ends. Repairs were completed under Claicant' s supervision and the car was released on that same date. Some five hundred (500) miles later a t Swanville, Pennsylvania, the train in which the car was traveling, was involved in a derailment. Suspicion pointed to the pulling out of the east end coupler on car TTa 478593 as the cause of t3)n Oerailment.

Porm 1 Award No. 7001
 Page 2 Docket No. 6833
 2-N &A'-CM-' 7 6
 On August 23, 1973 Claimant received the following notice of investiga
 tion:
 "You are hereby requested to report to the office of General
 Foreman, on Tuesday, August 280, 1973, at 3:00 P.M., to
 determine your responsibility, if any, in the improper perfor
 mance of your duties on Sunday, August 19th. 1973, in that
 improper repair was made to the East End coupler retainer
 pin plate, on car TTX 478593, resulting in the coupler pulling
 out and causing derailment of train AP-2, at Swanville, Pa.,
 on August 21st, 1973.
 Should you desire to have your duly authori~ed repres~lnfatives
 and/or witnesses present, please arrange for their attendance."

 Following several postponements the herring was he 1 d on Sentember 19, 1973 and thereafter on October 18, 1973 Claimant was advised as follows:

            "This is to advise that you are being assessed a 30 day deferred suspension against your service reword as a result of `-he investigrtion held on Sente~ber 19th, 1973."


~.,1' By letter dated November 26, 1973 Petitioner appealed the 30 day deferred
 suspension on the grounds of insufficient evidence, violation of due process
 and condonation of the repair tcchnique by Carrier. 'the Carrier denied the
 appeal and asserted that Claimant was affarded the due notice and impartial
 hearing required by the Agreement, that sufficient evidence exists to support
 a finding of guilt and that the penalty assessed was not arbitrary, unreasonable
 or capricious.

        Review of the record facts shows that in coupler repairs the retainer

pin plates should be secured by four (4) 7/8 r. 3 bolts with a lock nut or unit
 lock nut, a s required by A.A.R. Rule 74. Uncontroverted tr:=ti mony ~t 'hC. he-'' afy ing
 indicates that on August 19, 1973 Carrier did not have lock nuts available or in
 stock for the repairs on car TTX 478593 and that car repair employees used regular
 nuts and then spoiled the threads. Petitioner asserts and Carrier nowhere denies
 that this practice was followed with the knowledge and tacit ae-ui-:ieencn of C=.r.rier's
 supervisory per..^,onnel. The record shows that since the derailment ill this case
 Carrier has jur6iFc-c:,d and is using lock nuts to secure bolts on retainer Dili
 plates.

 Claimant concedes that no lock nuts were used to affect re,airs to TTX 478593 but states that the bolts were tight and secure when he inspected same before the car left Calumet.
    Form 1 _ Award No. 7001

    page 3 Pocket No. 6833

    2-N&W-CM-' 76


In our judgment Carrier erred in assessing any discipline in this case because the evidence does not support the implicit accusation that the lack of lock nuts seas the proximate cause of the derailment 500 miles 0,".-ay and 5 day:; later. Equally important, however, is th-- fact that Carrier condoned and participated in the practice of spoiling threads and failing to use lock nuts by riot providing the required materials for the employees to use. In this situation where Carrier is :'.r~°~_:x° ~li.,a5~, if arguendo Claimant is at fault, it ill behooves management to punish an employee for alleged improper work performance it had effectively encouraged and abetted. We shall sustain the claim.

                            A W A R D


        Claim sustained.


                              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BMD

                              By Order of. Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

        Is


        ~~By semarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant


        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this loth day of February, 1976.