(American Train Dispatchers Association PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Burlington Northern Inc.

(a) Burlington Northern Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "the Carrier") violated the Agreement in effect between the parties, Article 24 thereof in particular, by demoting Train Dispatcher D. J. Hart to Telegrapher, effective December 13, 1973. Claimant being permanently disqualified as train dispatcher is a harsh and excessive penalty in the light of the facts and circumstances involved.

 (b) Carrier shall now be required to reinstate Claimant D. J. Hart as train dispatcher with all seniority and other rights intact, and to compensate him for wage loss
OPINION OF BOARD: Numerous prior awards of this Board set forth our function
 in discipline cases. Our function in discipline cases is
 not to substitute our judgment for the Carrier's, nor to decide the matter in
 accord with what we might or might not have done had it been ours to determine,
 but to pass upon the question whether, without weighing it, there is substan
 tial evidence to sustain a finding of guilty. If that question is decided in
 the affirmative, the penalty imposed for the violation is a matter which rests
 in the sound discretion of the Carrier. We are not warranted in disturbing
 Carrier's penalty unless we can say it clearly appears from the record that
 the Carrier's action with respect thereto was discriminatory, unjust, unreason
 able, capricious or arbitrary, so as to constitute an abuse of that discretion.

 At approximately 12:20 PM on November 23, 1973, Extra 6501 West struck and damaged a motor car on the Carrier's single track main line near mile post 34 between Rathdrum and Athol, Idaho, on the First Subdivision of the Montana Operating Division. Train movements over this portion of the railroad are governed by "Centralized Traffic Control" (GTC), which is opera ted and controlled by dispatchers employed in the Carrier's dispatching office in Spokane, Washington.

 GTC is a signal systgm under which train or engine movements are authorized by block signals whose indications supersede the superiority of trains for both opposing and following movements on the same track.


Motor cars operating in CTC territory are normally protected against the movement of trains by authority of the train dispatcher. In such instances, the train dispatcher provides signal blocking on the CTC machine for the specified territory over which the motor car movement occurs. The train dispatcher also issues a CTC track permit to the motor car operator showing the time autho instructions to "report clear" after the movement has been completed. The blocking must not be released or the signals cleared to permit a train movement into the protected t the train dispatcher that he is in the clear.

 During the time in question in the instant case, the Claimant was employed as a regularly assigned dispatcher in the Carrier's Spokane train dispatching office. His assigned hours on the date the incident in question occurred were from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM. The dispatching territory where the accident took place was under Claimant's jurisdiction.

 A review of the record in the instant case reveals that Claimant admitted he was responsible for the collision in that he lifted the block for the motor car permit off the board, and let train No. 97 enter the block before the expiration of .the authorized time for the motor car. In so doing, Claimant further admitted that he violated Rule 20 of the Train Dispatchers' Manual, and Rule 990 of the Consolidated Code of Operating Rules.

 Thus, the Board has no alternative but to conclude that there is substantial evidence to sustain a finding of guilty.

 Claimant's work record since June 3, 1967, shows a 15-day suspension on June 3, 1967 for responsibility in connection with a collision, a 20-day suspension on August 27, 1968 for responsibility in demolishing a motor car, a 30-day suspension on July 18, 1970, for failure to include a train on a line-up as provided in the Tmtm Dispatchers' Manual, and a dismissal on May 12, 1972, for violating Rules 990, 702 and General Rule A. This dismissal was rescinded on October 17, 1972, and Claimant was reinstated with former rights.

 In light of Claimant's recent work record and the seriousness of the incident in the instant case, the Board cannot find that Carrier's demotion of Claimant from a T 13, 1973, and Claimant's permanent disqualification as a Train Dispatcher, is unfair and excessive. Therefore, we will deny the claim.
                Award Number 21537 Page 3

                Docket Number TD-21340


        FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:


        That the parties waived oral hearing;


That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1°34;

 That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; an
        That the Agreement was not violated.


                    A W A R D


        Claim denied.


              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

              ~~By Order of Third Division


        ATTEST: Executive Secretary


        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 19th day of May 1977.