Claimant is employed by Carrier at its North Little Rock Jenks Facility in North Little Rock, Arkansas. On August 28, 1991, Claimant and his Manager met to discuss Claimant's safety record and to engage in training concerning working safely. As a result of the August 28, 1991, session, the Manager issued a letter to Claimant recording what took place at the session. Copies of the letter were placed in Claimant's personal file, as well as distributed to the Local Chairman and appropriate Management personnel. The letter reads as follows:
ON AUGUST 28, 1991, YOU ATTENDED A PERSONAL SAFETY CONFERENCE AT JENKS SHOP.
AS YOU WILL RECALL, WE DISCUSSED YOUR PERSONAL INJURY RECORD AND HOW YOU CAN AVOID BEING INJURED IN THE FUTURE. THE PURPOSE OF THE CONFERENCE WAS TO MAKE YOU AWARE OF YOUR PERSONAL INJURY EXPERIENCE AND HOW SAFETY EFFECTS YOU, YOUR FAMILY, AND ALL RAILROAD EMPLOYEES. WE APPRECIATE YOUR COOPERATION DURING THE MEETING AND YOUR COMMITMENT TO FOLLOW SAFE WORK PROCEDURES.
WE SINCERELY HOPE THIS MEETING WAS BENEFICIAL TO YOU AND WILL ASSIST YOU IN YOUR EFFORT TO BE A SAFE, PRODUCTIVE, AND EFFICIENT EMPLOYEE.
IF DESIRED, ADDITIONAL SAFETY TRAINING COVERING ANY FACET OF YOUR DUTIES WILL BE AFFORDED YOU UPON REQUEST.
As a result of this letter being placed in Claimant's file, a claim was filed alleging that the letter constituted discipline. Consequently, it was a violation of Rule 32 of the current controlling Agreement. Rule 32 states that an employe who is disciplined must first be afforded a fair and impartial hearing. The Organization reasoned that since the letter constituted discipline and no hearing was held, Carrier violated the Agreement. The letter and any reference to it should be expunged from all records of Carrier, as well as from Claimant's file.
Carrier takes the position that neither the safety conference on August 28, 1991, nor the letter in the Claimant's file memorializing the conference constitutes any form of discipline.
It is Carrier's position that the safety conference is meant to be instructive, nonthreatening, and an expression of the importance of working safely. The conference is not discipline and the letter merely indicates that Carrier has fulfilled its obligation to inform the employe about the advantage of working safely and instructing him on certain methods to be used to do so.
This Board has reviewed the identical issue with the same parties on numerous occasions. We have concluded on those occasions that placing a letter such as is at issue in this case in an employee's file does not constitute discipline and is not an Agreement violation. In those instances, the Board also stated that the recipients of such letters cannot be considered as first offenders. We see no reason to decide otherwise in this instance.
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be amde.