Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 28602
THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-28790
90-3-89-3-184
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Joseph A. Sickles when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The ten (10) demerit marks assessed to Mr. 0. Salaiz because he
was allegedly
'...
negligent in the performance of your duties while working
as a Crane Operator on January 20, 1988 resulting in damage to a hydraulic
jack near K-12 in the Steel Car Shop
...'
was arbitrary, capricious and in
violation of the Agreement (System File (DJ-8-88/UM-21-88).
(2) The ten (10) demerit marks assessed to Mr. Salaiz shall be
rescinded and he shall be reinstated as a crane operator with all seniority
rights unimpaired."
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.
Claimant was notified of a Hearing on an allegation that he was
negligent when he damaged a hydraulic jack. Subsequent to the Hearing, the
Claimant was assessed ten (10) demeritp and was disqualified as a Crane
Operator.
>_
At the Hearing, the Claimant admitted that while operating the payloader in reverse, the equipment w
the electrical box on said jack. The Claimant conceded that the ground was
not level and he knew that the payloader "articulates" when there is too much
weight on the front end. Even though he was aware that the wheels on the back
of the machine lift up, he backed up, on uneven ground, with a "huge bucket of
concrete."
Form 1 Award No. 28602
Page 2 Docket No. MW-28790
90-3-89-3-184
At the Hearing, in the appeals process, and before this Board the
Organization asserted that the charges were not precise because they alleged
damage to a hydraulic jack, whereas the evidence showed damage to an electrical box. But the evidenc
electrical box was attached to, and can be considered part of, the hydraulic
jack. The Claimant was well aware of the damage involved since he brought it
to the Carrier's attention and clearly was not misled by the written charges.
The Organization suggests that these charges are merely part of a continuing effort to discredit
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Attest:
445too
Nancy J.690LFr - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of October 1990.
