( freight Handlers. Express and Station Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:



(1) Carrier violated the Agreement between the Parties When it determined that Operator J. A. Tnrano vas responsible for light Engines 7432-6453-7139-7138-6401, multiple cowpled, side- swiping Cumberland Train. 96 at Virginia Laos, Cumberland, Mar land, an October 20, 1976, and. suspended him from service far fif (15) days, and

 (2) Carrier, because of such impropriety, shall reverse the decision rendered sssessing discipline and exonerate Mr. Toraw of involved charges and, by reason thereo2, compensate him for an time lost, at the rate of X48.13 per day, far each date of the fifteen days suspended.

 CPIIPI= C! BOARD: C7almant, J. A. Tursno, a third trick operator at
connection with his responsibility far an accident vhieh occurred on
 October 20, 19'(6, resulting in damages to Company property in excess of
 $'5r000· Claimant vas given an investigative hearing an October 26, 1976,
 and snbseqmsatly inforeed by letter dated November 15s, 1976.. that he had
 bean adjudged guilty as charged. Accordingly, Carrier imposed a fifteen
 (15) dM1T disciplinary suspension aeon the Cltisaat.

 The Carrier submits CaAA&wt vas responsible for the accident by reason of his failure to cumgly vitk Operating Rate l0k-B which required that he line the crossoror switch four stmt track movement. By his am admission at the investigation, Carrier notes, Claimant stated he left the crossover switch open. Carrier asserts that u a direct result of Claimant's action, five (5) light engines, coupled in multiple, moving east to vest from MYrd A to the ronndliovae, proceeded into the Virginia Tsne station limits on the iagroperly lined crossover and side-wiped eastbound Train Cumberland 96.


The Organization argues the blame for the accident lies not with the claimant but rather with the crew operating the rive (5) light engines., as said crew proceeded into the Virginia IA= station limits without proper authority. Such proper aatharityp asserts the Orgfnization, floss fran hand and light circmstances of the instant ease., take precedence over hand operated switches. Ea support of this latter poiatp the Organisation altos Maryland Division Timetable No. 2, Special bnstmnctiess i-l* and 5-93 which read in relevant part as follows:

















                  Docket Number CL-22916


        "Crossover Crossover movements fouling either

        Yovemeats the Eastbound Running Track, West

        RUNming Running Track, Westbornd Engine

        Tracks head will first secure permission

        tram the Operator at Baltimore St.,

        ND Tower or Virginia Awe:


        The Organization submits that reliance on hand and light signals

governing movements of trains and engines in Crmberlsnd Yard falls within
 that part of Role 104-B which reads, "Unless otherwise provided, the
 normal position for all crossovers is for straight track movement".
 Thus argues the Organization, Claimant's having left the crossover
 switch open does not constitute a violation of Operating Rule 104-B,
 because the hand and light signals is the alternate alternate.otharvine provided
 in the above cited last line of the Rule.

 Upon a close and careful review of all the evidence of record, the Board makes the following determinations:

        1. Claimant vas afforded a fair and impartial hearing.


            2. The discipline imposed on Claimant vas neither discriminatory, arbitrary, capricious or excessive.


        3. There is nothing in the record before us with regard to

        the facts that would cause us to modify or set aside Carrier's

        original finding of Claimant's guilt in connection with his

        responsibility for the subject accident and resultant

        damage to Company property. As we have said many times in

        numerous other cases involving d1scipline, we shall not sub

        stitute our judgment fox that of the Carrier unless it is

        proven that Claimant vas denied his/her due process ruts

        and where the action taken against Claimant vas either

        discriminatory, arbitrary, capricious or excessive.


        FM)IM3: The Third Division of the Adjustment Hoard, 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 ere respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway IMbW Act, as approved June 21, 1934;
                  Avard Nusber 23l96 rage 4

                  Docket Number X916


That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involvsd.herein; and

        That the Agreezeat vas not violated.


                    A W A R D


        Class denied.


                        NATIONAL RAILRQAD ADJD89MT BOARD

                        By Order of Third Division

ATTEST: ~~ 61&45e~

      Emecutive secretary


Dated at Chicago, Ulinoisj, this 27th day of February 1981..

                  1


    >: r


i

t