NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number MW-22038
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood
that:
(1) The dismissal of Trackman M. A. Young was without just
and sufficient cause (System File B-1478).
(2) Claimant Young shall now be granted the privileges and
benefits of Agreement Rule 91(b) (6).
OPINION OF BOARD: The Foreman and the Special Equipment Operator
complained to the Roadmaster that it was unsafe
for them to work with the Claimant, M. A. Young. Specifically, they
alleged:
"He ducks under the rail when handling rail in the air.
When carrying rail from one location to another, he
walks with his feet under the rail. When hooking
rail, he hooks so far from the center, that the rail
is unsafe to handle. That causes more wear and tear
on the machine. It is hard to keep the rail out of
the boom. This happens every day that he is here.
You also know when the cable gets crossed up, and a
load hits it, it will break, or be cut where crossed.
He is the only one that has ever been around this
welding plant that can't keep the slack out of the
cable. He has been told how, when, and where to hook
the rail, and he has been shown many, many times how
to do it. It does not do any good."
The Foreman removed the Claimant from service January 30, 1976,
for unsafe work and unsafe actions. A formal investigation was conducted
February 17, 1976, and the Claimant was permanently removed from the
service of the Carrier by letter dated February 20, 1976.
The Carrier subsequently agreed to reinstate the Claimant
March 29, 1976, without pay for time lost.
Award Number 21830 Page 2
Docket Number MW-22038
The record clearly indicates that some discipline is warranted.
However, the discipline should be reduced to a 30 day suspension.
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 within the meaning of the Railway
Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction
aver the dispute involved herein; and
That the discipline was excessive.
Claim sustained as indicated in the Opinion.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
-4w,
PAWe&5roe
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 6th day of January 1978.