NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Locket Number MW-25274
Paul C. Carter, Referee
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Consolidated Rail Corproation
(Former Penn Central Transportation Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The dismissal of Carpenter G. L. Wilson for alleged violation of
"Rule 3000· was without just and sufficient cause (System Locket 677).
(2) The claimant shall be reinstated with seniority and all other
rights unimpaired, his record cleared and he shall be compensated for all wage
loss suffered.
OPINION OF BOARD: Prior to the occurrence giving rise to the dispute herein,
Claimant, with about four years of service, was employed as
a carpenter, working under the supervision of Carpenter Foreman J. L. Lafferty.
On November 6, 1980, Claimant was instructed to appear for a trial on November
18, 1980, on the charge:
"Violation of Safety Rule 3000: 'Injured employe must
immediately:
(a) Inform immediate supervisor, even though extent
of injury appears trivial. When person in
charge is not in immediate vicinity inform him
at earliest opportunity but not later than
quitting time on day of occurrence.
(b) Obtain medical attention.'"
The trial was postponed and conducted on December 5, 1980. Following
the trial, Claimant was dismissed from the service on December 19, 1980. A
transcript of the trial has been made a part of the record. We find that the
trial was conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Objection was raised to
the introduction of Claimant's prior record in the trial. We do not find such
procedure to be in violation of the Agreement or prejudicial to Claimant. An
employe's past record may always be considered in determining the discipline to
be imposed for a proven offense, but not as proof to sustain the charge.
There was substantial evidence adduced at the investigation, including
Claimant's statement, that Safety Rule 3000, quoted in the notice of charge,
was not complied with by Claimant. In the trial, or investigation, Claimant
alleged that he was injured on duty on September 19, 1980, and testified that
he had never reported the alleged injury to his Foreman. He stated that he
reported the injury to the Supervisor Structures ·About a month after the
injury. I'm not sure." The Supervisor Structures testified that the first
knowledge he had of an alleged injury to Claimant was on November 4, 1980, but
he understood that the injury occurred on September 23. The Assistant Supervisor
Structures testified:
Award Number 25157 Page 2
Docket Number MW-25274
"g. Mr. McDade on the morning of September 23, 1980,
did you receive a call from Mr. Wilson and if so
what was it about?
A. Yes, I did, he told me that he was going home and
going to have to hunt a doctor that something was
wrong and I asked him if he was hurt, and he told
me No, he didn't know what was wrong. I told him
to go on home. I did question him, tho, if he was
hurt on the job. He said, No, he didn't know what
was wrong, he was going to see a chiropractor.
Q. Did Mr. Wilson at some later date inform you that
he may have been injured while on duty?
A. No, sir."
The Carpenter Foreman testified that Claimant never informed him of any
alleged on-duty injury.
It is clear from the trial that Claimant did not comply with the
explicit provisions of Safety Rule 3000. The Board recognzies the importance
of promptly submitting personal injury reports. The Carrier is entitled to
receive such reports promptly, as such incidents may involve liability on the
part of the Carrier, and any employe who does not comply with the accident
reporting rule does so at his peril. I
Based upon the record, there is no proper basis for the Board to
interfere with the disciplinary action of the Carrier.
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 over the
dispute involved herein; and
That the Agreement was not violated.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
Nancy .fiver, Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 30th day of November 1984.