The Claimant was charged with two Rule violations in connection with an injury he sustained on July 14, 1997. He scraped his right shin on the tongue of a compressor as he was alighting from the back bumper of a pickup truck while carrying a carton of bottled water. He sustained a cut or abrasion approximately one inch by one-quarter inch within a reddened area approximately two inches in diameter.

The first charge related to the Claimant's failure to observe and avoid obstructions while getting off of standing equipment. The second charge pertained to his delayed seeking of medical attention and late reporting of the injury. After the Investigation held August 13, 1997, the second charge was dropped. However, the Claimant was found culpable for the first charge.

Although there is sharp conflict in some of the key testimony, our review of the Hearing transcript does not reveal any significant procedural shortcomings in the conduct of the Hearing by the Hearing Officer. Moreover, albeit refuted by the Claimant, the record does contain substantial evidence in support of the Carrier's disciplinary action. While the Claimant maintained thathis left foot slipped off the truck bumper before his right foot reached the ground, the Carrier's Bridge Production Engineer testified otherwise. According to the Engineer's testimony, the Claimant did not report any slippage of his left foot to have been a causative factor at the time of their initial discussion of the circumstances surrounding the injury. It was, therefore, within the province of the Hearing Officer to resolve the credibility issue resulting from this testimonial conflict. His finding in favor of the Bridge Production Engineer was permissible.

Given the foregoing considerations as well as the minimal penalty assessed, we have no proper basis for disturbing the Carrier's disciplinary action.

AWARD