Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 27173
THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-26531
88-3-85-3-269
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Robert W. McAllister when award was rendered.

(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


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

(1) The five (5) working days of suspension imposed upon Repairman G. T. Vickers for alleged 'Failure to comply with Safety Rule /13111, at Canton M.W. Shop, Canton, Ohio at approximately 7:30 P.M., on November 30, 1983, which resulted in a personal injury' was without just and sufficient cause and on the basis of unproven charges (System Docket CR-783-D).

(2) The claimant's record shall be cleared of the charge leveled against him and he shall be compensated for all wage loss suffered."

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 employees 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.



The Claimant is a repairman with seven years of service and no prior discipline. On January 27, 1984, he was issued a five (5) day suspension for violation of Safety Rule 3111. According to the Carrier, the Claimant injured his hand when, on November 30, 1983, the punch he was using slipped, and he hit his hand with a hammer. The Carrier believes the evidence clearly establishes the Claimant impro the Hub City gear box and should have known from previous mistakes, injury, and counseling that other options were available to safely perform his duties. The Organization views the record differently and insists the Carrier presented no evidence the Clai Form 1 Award No. 27173
Page 2 Docket No. MW-26531
88-3-85-3-269







The Carrier presented no witness to the charged violation, and we find the
Carrier's retrospective second guessing of supposed viable alteratives to be
in the nature of presumption rather than fact. In terms of fact, the
Carrier's primary alternative; i.e., "welding the race", is again based upon
presumption. We emphasize that there is no evidence that, after such a
procedure, the use of a punch and hammer is not necessary.






                          By Order of Third Division


Attest: _
        Nancy J. - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 23rd day of June 1988.