Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 28251
THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-28311
90-3-88-3-71
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee John C. Fletcher when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Union Pacific Railroad Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The thirty (30) days' suspension imposed upon Section Foreman
L. Henry for allegedly
'...
being responsible for yard conditions resulting in
derailment
...
on 7/17/86....' was without just and sufficient cause, on the
basis of unproven charges and in violation of the Agreement (System File
D-96/870292G).
(2) The Claimant's record shall be cleared of the charges 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 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.
On July 17, 1986, a derailment occurred in Carrier's Las Vegas Yard.
It was determined that the accident was caused by excessive track gauge resulting from progressive w
time, was responsible for inspection of the track involved. On July 28, 1986,
he was given notice to attend an Investigation on a charge, reading in part:
"AS FOREMAN OF THE LAS VEGAS YARD ON THE 17TH OF
JULY, 1986, YOU SHOULD HAVE ENSURED THAT PROPER
TRACK STANDARDS WERE COMPLIED WITH TO ENSURE
SAFE TRAIN MOVEMENT. AS A RESULT OF INADEQUATE
TRACK MAINTENANCE YOU ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE
FOLLOWING RULES: GENERAL RULES A, B, 1700,
1725, AND 1860 AS CONTAINED IN MAINTENANCE OF
WAY RULE BOOK, EFFECTIVE APRIL 28, 1985."
Form 1 Award No. 28251
Page 2 Docket No. MW-28311
90-3-88-3-71
At the Investigation, two Carrier Supervisors testified as to the
cause of the derailment. Also, evidence was introduced that Claimant, as
Foreman, was required to have track under his jurisdiction inspected once a
week. Claimant admitted that the track in the area of the derailment had not
been inspected during the preceding thirty days. His defense for not having
done so was that he had too much work, a shortage of employees, and higher
priorities. There is, though, no evidence that he ever advised any official
of such problems.
It is our view that Carrier has developed, with adequate evidence,
that Claimant was guilty of the charges placed against him. Additionally, the
transcript of the Hearing does not indicate that Claimant's procedural rights,
as established by the Agreement, were breached, so as to require that the
discipline assessed be modified. With respect to the level of discipline imposed, thirty days suspen
Claimant's prior service record.
The discipline assessed will not be disturbed.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Attest:
Nancy J.,9vAf - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 1st day of February 1990.