Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT 7,OARD Award No. 8873
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 8533
2-sPT-FO-'32
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Francis X. Quinn when award was rendered.
International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers
.Parties to Dispute:
( Southern Pacific Transportation Company

Dispute: Claim of Employes:









Findings:

The Second Division of ,.he 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 pro respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act ts approved June 21, 1934,

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



Mr. R. Dates (hereinafter referred to as the Claimant) entered Carrier's service i November 21, 1950 as a. laborer. On June 6, 1973, he was dismissed from service &id :~ubsequently reinstated on August 2, 1978.

On September 21, 1979, Claimant was assigned as laborer-Gang leader. At approximately 2:15 PM, Carrier's General Foreman instructed the Claimant to replace a used fire extinguisher. Claimant refused, stating it was not his job.

As a result of this occurrence, Claimant was notified to appear for formal hearing by letter dated September 22, 1978.

On the basis of the evidence adduced at the hearing evaluated on October 12, 1978 Claimant was suspended from service for a period of 45 days.
Forrr° 1 Award No. 8873
Page 2 Docket No. 8533
2 -S PT-F 0 -' 82

The formal hearing record clearly and conclusively established Claimant's responsibility for refusing to follow the reasonable instructions given him on September 21, 1978. He not only refused to change the fire extinguisher as instructed by Carrier°s Officer but also refused to accanpany him to a telephone so that the Claimant°s immediate supervisor could be consulted and the matter clarified.

The Organization contends that a misunderstanding had emerged as to whose job the filling of the extinguisher belonged to. This is not the case. Claimant flatly refused to service it when asked by his supervisor, refused to go with the supervisor when told, started to drive away instead and refused to stop when ordered. Carrier had basis to invoke discipline. However, punishment should fit the crime. We find forty-five (45) days' suspension excessive and order that it be reduced to thirty (30) days.






                            By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

By
        rie Brasch - Administrative Assistant


Dated at thicago, Illinois, this 27th day of January, 1982.