PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

 (1) The dismissal of Section Foreman George M. Vaughan, Jr., was without just and sufficient cause and wholly disproportionate to the charge leveled against him (System Vile D-31-79/MW-23-79)·

 (2) Section Foreman George M. Vaughan, Jr. shall be reinstated with seniority and all other rights unimpaired and be compensated for ell wage lose suffered, including overtime, all in accordance with Rule 28(d)."

 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant, Section Foreman George M. Vaughan, Jr., was notified
 on May 21, 1979, that he should appear at a hearing on
 may 24, 1979, to determine if, by his actions while the operator of a motor
 car on may 18, 1979, he was careless concerning his safety, as well as the safety
 of other employes, specifically, Laborer R. Brewer.

 The hearing was held as scheduled. Claimant was found guilty of being careless of his and others safety and was dismissed from Carrier's service. The transcript of that hearing was made a part of the record of this case. A review of that transcript reveals that claimant was afforded a fair hearing. The hearing officer's insistance that only questions be asked that related to the incident is not grounded in any arbitral law, but his behavior did not in our judgment prejudice Claimant's case.

 A review of the record also reveals that Claimant was in fact careless and did operate the motor car in violation of Carrier's safety rules. By showing Laborer Brewer to be a human coupling between the motor car and the track car, he did place his life in danger. To allow Brewer to put himself in a situation in which he could fall in front of a moving motor car is by anyone's standard unacceptable behavior.

 Carrier was correct in administering severe discipline to Claimant. As a Foreman, he should set an example for the safe operation of the equipment. Carrier offered Claimant a chance to return to work as a Track Laborer. Claimant should have accepted Carrier's offer and made the best of it. He chose not to do so at his own peril. Carrier made this offer of reinstatement to Claimant with the understanding that he not return to work as a Foreman because of this incident, as well as because of his poor safety record in the past. This was a sound decision. The Board however is of the opinion that claimant should not be separated from Carrier's employ permanently. We are therefore reinstating claimant to a Track Laborer's position with all seniority rights unimpaired, but
 Award Number 23559
 Docket Number h&1-23807

 Page 2

 with no back pay. Claimant should not be barred from pidding future supervisory jobs when Carrier is satisfied that he meets the requirements.



That the Carrier ;end the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1931+

 That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction aver the dispute involved herein; and

A W A R D
Claimant shell be reinstated as a laborer with seniority, but with no back pay.

 ATTEST: Acting Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

By Order of Third Division


By
 R rte Breech - n etra ve Assistant

 Dated a Chicagos. Illinoiep this 10th day of March 1982.