The thrust of the Organization's Claim is that the Carrier has not met the burden of proof in its disciplinary actions against the Claimant, but merely utilized assumption in the place of substantial evidence. The Claimant was injured on August 19, 1992 during an incident with another employee.
The Board has fully reviewed the transcript and finds that the Carrier's case is substantial, related to the Rules and clearly supported by the testimony taken at the formal Investigation. First, the Claimant admits it was a fight and further that the injury sustained was related to the fight. In fact, the Claimant states that he "invited him to go outside." Second, the other employee charged admits to the substance of an angry exchange. This Board's review finds the relevant evidence goes well beyond assumption and firmly satisfies the burden of proof.
The Board has often ruled that this form of conduct can lead to discharge (Second Division Awards 11728, 10450, 10353, 8572, 7347). Such conduct cannot be accepted in this industry where even serious verbal altercations can diminish the safety of the workplace. In considering the Carrier's discipline, the Board has reviewed the Claimant's past disciplinary record. This is not the first time the Claimant has been disciplined for an altercation. After his last altercation he was warned that continued altercations would lead to dismissal. Clearly, that warning was not sufficient to change his behavior. Considering all the facts of this record including the Claimant's admission of guilt, and past disciplinary record, the Carrier's discipline of dismissal will not be disturbed. The Claim is denied.
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made. Form 1 Award No. 12850