Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No.
7633
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
7465
2-N&W-CM-'78
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Arthur T. Van Wart when award was rendered.
( System Federation
No. 16,
Railway Employes'
( ,Department, A. F. of L. - CI. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)
( Norfolk and Western Railway Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That carrier violated the current working agreement when Carman
J. R. Saulters was unjustly assessed a fifteen
(15)
day actual
suspension as a result of investigation held on December
9, 1975.
2. That carrier b e ordered to remove fifteen
(15)
day actual
suspension from Carman J. R. Saulters' service record, compensate
him for all time lost account said unjust discipline, make him
whole for all seniority rights and all other rights and privileges
he would have received had he not been unjustly assessed fifteen
(15)
day actual suspension.
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 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.
Claimant Carman was cited for investigation in connection with
violation of Safety Rule 1002. Investigation was held and as a result
thereof Claimant was subsequently- suspended for the period December
through December
18, 1975.
Claim before the Board is for removal of the
fifteen
(15)
day suspension and compensation for lost time plue other
benefits.
That part of Safety Rule 1002 here pertinent reads:
"Hair must b e so worn as not to interfere with clear
vision or otherwise present a safety hazard."
i
Form 1 Award No.
7633
Page 2 Docket No.
7465
2-N&W-CM-'78
The record discloses that there had been previous discussions between
Claimant and local officials regarding the length of his hair. It is
undisputed that Claimant's hair style was considered in compliance with
Safety Rule 1002 so long as it was kept under his helmet in the performance
of his duties. Here the charges were instituted when Car Foreman Preiss
walked into the shanty where Claimant had just completed eating his lunch
and found Claimant with his helmet off and his hair
hanging down
in a pony
tail.
This Board believes it unreasonable and an abuse of Carrier's
discretionary right for it to hold that it was unsafe and in violation of
Safety Rule 1002 when Claimant removed his helmet while eating his lunch
in the shanty. Consequently in such circumstance, we will sustain the claim.
A W A R D
Claim sustained.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
By
semarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Date at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of July, 1978.