Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No.
85'9
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
8366
2-WT-CM-'80
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee George S. Roukis when award was rendered.
( Brotherhood Railway Carmen of the United States
Parties to Dispute: and Canada
RECEIVED
( Washington Terminal Company
DEC 20 1980
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
P, E. VCCISSE
1. That under the current agreement upgraded Apprentice Steven M. Krouse
was unjustly dealt with when he was taken out of service August 23,
1978,
and as a result of an investigation by letter from Master Mechanic
E. D. Laird dated November
3, 1978
was given a three
(3)
day suspension,
in addition to four hours penalty which was unjust and in violation of
rule
29.
2. That the Washington Terminal Company be ordered to reimburse Mr. Krouse
for his net wage loss
of
three
(3)
days and four (4) hours pay and his
record be cleared, due
to
this unjust treatment by Carrier.
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 was removed from his tour of duty on August 23,
1978
because of
alleged discourteous and vituperative behavior toward General Foreman P. H. Cooley.
He was permitted to return to work the next day and then notified by letter, dated,
August
28, 1978
that an investigative hearing was scheduled on September
5, 1978
to determine whether he was guilty of violating Carrier's General Rules K and N
and the additional allegation
that
he did not cover his assignment or have the
appropriate tools to perform his work. He was subsequently apprised by the Master
Mechanic on September 14,
1978
that he was found guilty of the charged specifications
and issued a three
(3)
day suspension. This disposition was appealed on the property
and is now before this Division.
In defense
of
his position, Claimant contends that he was harassed and agitated
by the General Foreman and not provided with the proper tools to cut the inbound
motor off of Amtrak Train
83.
He asserted that he was directed to perform work
under unsafe conditions and that he merely informed Mr. Cooley
of
the potential
hazards. Carrier disputes these contentions and argues that he was discourteous,
Form 1 Award No.
8549
page 2 Docket No.
8366
2-WT-CM-'80
bellicose and impermissibly away from his assigned work station. General Foreman
Cooley testified that Claimant persistently abused him after the aforesaid work was
completed.
In our review of this case, we agree with Carrier's finding that Claimant-was
discourteous toward Foreman Cooley. Claimant was not at his assigned area when
Mr. Cooley found him in the terminal waiting room and certainly not responsible
when he carelessly left his tools on a tractor. But to compound his problem, he
needlessly harangued the General Foreman, when he finished making the cut around
the shop car with tools that he considered unsuitable. It might well be that he
was correct when he told the General Foreman that performing this work with a
hammer and a bar was unsafe. But he went beyond the bounds of permissible decorum
when he continued his criticism in a plainly discourteous tone. The General
Foreman did not act improperly under these conditions when he peremptorilly
removed Claimant from service and Carrier's later finding that he violated General
Rules K and N is supported by the record. On the other hand, we recognize that
Claimant's concern for workplace safety warrants some mitigative consideration,
although it does not excuse his behavior. We will reduce the three
(3)
day
suspension to one (1) day suspension to comport with this finding and our judicial
requirement that discipline be corrective in nature.
A W A R D
Claim sustained to the extent expressed herein.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUS=NT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
B7y
_,fi~semarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated tat Chicago, Illinois, this 17th day of December,
1980.