Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 27091
THIRD DIVISION Docket No. TD-26911
88-3-85-3-687
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Re·eree Herbert L. Marx, Jr. when award was rendered.
(American Train Dispatchers Association
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(The Baltimore and Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad Companv
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Request that the discipline of ten (10) days overhead suspension be
removed from Chief Train Dispatcher A. J. Romeo's service record, and that he
be compensated for any time lost attending the investigation. Carrier file
DG-271."
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board upon the whole record
and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this
dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the
Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
The Claimant, an Assistant Chief Train Dispatcher, was subject to an
investigative hearing and charged with refusal to comply with the instructions
of the Power Coordinator, while on duty as Assistant Chief Train Dispatcher at
Barr Yard at approximately 11:54 p.m., C.S.T., on Tuesday, December 4, 1984.
Following the hearing, the Claimant was assessed a disciplinary penalty of ten
days' overhead suspension.
The Organization argued at the hearing and subsequently that the
notice of the investigation, as quoted above, did not comport with the requirement of Article 12(b)
The Organization notes in particular the absence of reference to violation of
any Rule.
Form 1 Award No. 27091
Page 2 Docket No. TD-26911
88-3-85-3-687
The Board finds that the charge was sufficiently precise in that it
particularized the nature if the alleged offense. The Organization and t`ie
Claimant had no difficult: in presenting a full defense to the charge. Iii
instances such as this, tie charge was adequately stated for compliance with
Rule 12(h), even with);it -nle citation.
The events which '.ed t.3 the charge occurred in the last five minutes
if the Claimant's on-duty stat,is. He received a telephone call from the Piwer
Coordinator to "hold 2 CF riiis t,) protect an on time call for DT 10." The
Carrier's conclusion was sat the Claimant refused to comply with the dirertion. The Claimant's posi_
Chief Train Dispatcher whi was present and who was in the process if relieving
him. The relieving Assistaut Chief Train Dispatcher took over the telephone
immediately.
The discipline assessed against the Claimant was based on alleged
violation if Rules K and K-2, which read in part as follows:
"Civil and courteous behavior is required of
all employees in their dealings with the public
and with each other
....
Employees must not be disloyal, dishonest,
insubordinate, immoral, quarrelsome, vicious,
careless or incompetent. They must not willfully neglect their duty, endanger life or
property or make false statements or conceal
facts concerning matters under investigation."
Based upon the record, the Board finds that there is insufficient
proof of violation if such Rules, despite contrasting testimony as to the
exact stature of the brief exchange of conversation between the Claimant and
the Power Coordinator. There is, therefore, no basis for the resulting
discipline.
A W A R D
Claim sustained.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Attest.
Nancy J. er - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 17th day of May 1988.