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

Brotherhood that:

(1) The five (5) day overhead suspension imposed upon Equipment Operator S. Stone for alleged failure '... to notify your supervisor of your personal injury prior to leaving company property.' on November 26, 1990, was without just and sufficient cause, unwarranted, on the basis of unproven charges and in violation of the Agreement [Carrier's File 12 (91-211) MNN].

(2) The Claimant's record shall be cleared of the charges leveled against him and of the five (5) day overhead suspension imposed upon him."

By letter dated December 18, 1990, Carrier's Division Engineer directed Claimant to report for a formal Investigation to determine his responsibility, if any,

" ..in connection with your personal injury at Mileport Q-169.2, Chicago Division, Monon Subdivision, Bainbridge, Indiana, at or about 1815 Hrs. CSX Standard Time, on November 26, 1990."

Following the December 27, 1990 Investigation and by letter dated January 23, 1991, the Division Engineer assessed Claimant a five day overhead suspension "in that you failed to notify your supervisor of your personal injury prior to leaving company property."

The record reveals that the Carrier intended to investigate only the Claimant's responsibility in relation to the personal injury and not his alleged failure to report said injury prior to leaving the property. In this connection, Second Division Award 3808 and Third Division Award 20686 are relevant as follows:

AWARD 3808

"...An employe may not be tried on one charge and convicted of another."

AWARD 20686

"There can be no question but that the object of the investigation was to specifically determine who was responsible for the accident in order that those responsible might be properly disciplined. The investigation brought out that the Claimants had violated Rule 25 in a matter apart from the accident under investigation.

Did the notice given contain language sufficiently broad to include the violation for which the Claimants were disciplined? We think not."

As a final matter, the General Chairman, in his closing statement at the Investigation, alleged that the Carrier violated Rule 19 (a) which reads, in pertinent part, as follows:

"An employe in the service sixty (60) calendar days or more will not be disciplined or dismissed without first being given a fair and

"The only complaint relative to the absence of a stenographer was made by the Representative during his closing statement of the Hearing. The parties may not participate in the proceeding without objection and then complain for the first time at the end of the proceeding."

A W A R D