Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 11015
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 11122
2-SSR-F&O-'86
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee W. J. Peck when award was rendered.
(International Brotherhood of Firemen & Oilers
Parties to Dispute:
(Seaboard System Railroad

Dispute: Claim of Employes:

1. That under the current and controlling agreement, Laborer, J. A. Douglas was unjustly suspended from service of the Seaboard System Railroad, Waycross, Georgia, on January 21, 1985 through January 23, 1985, both dates inclusive, after a formal investigation was held on January 4, 1985.

2. That accordingly, Laborer J. A. Douglas be compensated for the days of January 21, 1985 through January 23, 1985, both dates inclusive, and the payment of 10% interest rate be added thereto.

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 employes 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.



The Claimant is a Laborer employed by the Carrier at Carrier's Diesel. and Car Repair facilities at Waycross, Georgia. Apart of his assigned working duties is that of Folklift Truck Operator. In the performance of his duties as a Forklift Truck Operator the use of a radio is required and which must: be signed for at the time it was received.

On date of December 13, 1984 a radio which had been assigned to the Claimant was found damaged on a roadway at Carrier's repair facility, it had apparently been run over by some heavy vehicle perhaps another forklift truck_ Claimant used it several times previously during the day.
Form 1 Award No. 11015
Page 2 Docket No. 11122
2-SSR-F&0-'86
On December 28, 1984 the Carrier sent Claimant the following notice: low













The Investigation was held as scheduled and on date of January 15, 1985 the Carrier advised Claimant that:



In considering all of the facts and all of the testimony presented in this case it is clear that there was neglect on the part of the Claimant, but there was not an iota of testimony that evidenced anything willful or intentional about that neglect. We find no violation of Rule 15. Willful or intentional neglect or willful or intentional breaking of tools is infinitely more serious than unintentional neglect or unintentional breaking of tools and could reflect very badly on the Claimant if some other incident comes up in the future wherein the Claimant may again find himself in a position of unintentionally being in violation of some Carrier Rule, it could result in a much
Form 1 Award No. 11015
Page 3 Docket No. 11122
2-SSR-F&0-'86

greater penalty. We therefore rule that the Carrier is to remove words "willful neglect" and leave it simply "neglect" and remove all reference to Rule 15. We shall not disturb the three day suspension.






                              By Order of Second Division


Attest:

Nancy J -*SX0L11er-- Executive Secretary

Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 1st day of October 1986.