NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Frank Elkouri, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF SLEEPING CAR PORTERS
THE PULLMAN COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
* * * for and in behalf of F. Haynes, who
is now, and for a number of years past has been, employed by The Pullman
Company as a porter operating out of the Chicago Central District:
Because The Pullman Company did, under date of September
24, 1956, take disciplinary action against Porter Haynes by giving
him an actual suspension of 9s/ days from his regular assignment
in the Chicago Central District.
Further because said action was based on charges unproved, and
the charge "you engaged in a fight with Conductor D. Ahlfeld during
which you used obscene language to him and struck him" was not
proved beyond a reasonable doubt as is required by the second paragraph of Rule 49 of the Agreement between The Pullman Company
and Porters, Attendants, Maids & Bus Boys in the service of The
Pullman Company in the United States of America and Canada,
represented by the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters.
And Further, for Porter F. Haynes' record to be cleared of the
charge in the instant case, and for him to be reimbursed for the 9 s/
days he lost as a result of this unjust action.
OPINION OF BOARD:
Claimant Haynes was charged with engaging in
a fight with, and use of obscene language toward, Conductor D. Ahlfeld.
Although the facts of the incident upon which the charge was based cannot be
adequately determined by considering only Claimant's version of the incident
or by considering only Conductor Ahlfeld's version, the facts do emerge with
adequate clarity and assurance from a consideration of the statements of both
men. These statements, considered together, reveal by the required degree of
proof that (1) tension or ill will had existed between Claimant and Conductor
Ahlfeld, (2) that both men shared the responsibility for this personal
antagonism situation, and (3) that this antagonism culminated in a verbal and
physical skirmish in which neither man was without fault. The Carrier had
reasonable basis for punishing both men, which it did by the penalty of sus-
f7331
9519-2
734
pension. The Record provides no support for Claimant Haynes' request that
Carrier's action in
punishing him be disturbed by this Board.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving
the parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and upon the whole
record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the
meaning of
the Railway Labor Act, as
approved June 21, 1934;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein; and
That the penalty assessed by the Carrier should not be disturbed.
AWARD
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD
DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 4th day of August, 1960.