Form I NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
 
THIRD DIVISION
  
Award 0.3727
  
Docket 
loo. 
-37654
  
04-3-0--7 7
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
.
Joan Parker when ward was rendered.
 
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of 
ay 
Employee
TIE TO DISPUTE:
 
(The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company
 
~ (former Burlington Orthern Railroad Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(11). 
The discipline [thirty (30) day record suspension and 
a
probation period of one (l) year] imposed on September ,
2000 upon r. R. J. Julius in connection with alleged violation
of Burlington Northern Santa Fe ally Maintenance of ay
Operating ales 1.3.1 and Maintenance f ay Safety Rule S13.1.1 Nile assigned t Gillette, Wyoming on July , 2000 as
unwarranted, on the basis of unproven charges and in violation
of the Agreement [System File C-ol--090- I10-o1-000-
(  1.
(2) The claim* as presented Vice General Chairman . I.
ickens to Superintendent T. osil 
0 
September 25, 2000
shall a allowed as presented because said claim as not
disallowed accordance with ale 2.
(3) As a consequence of the violation referred to in Parts (1) and/or
(2) above, r. . J. Juilus shall now receive the remedy
prescribed the parties in ale 0().
* The initial letter of claim ill a reproduced within our initial
submission.
Form 1  ward . 727
.Page Docket o. -3754
   
0-3--3-7 7
FINDINGS:
.
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the
evidence, 
finds 
than
The carrier 
or 
carriers and the employee 
or 
employees involved in this dispute
are -respectively carrier and employee 
within 
the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,
as approved Juke 21,1934.
This Division' of the Adjustment Board ha~ jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
Late in the morning on July 2, 2000, the Claimant, a Maintenance ng
Foreman with more 
than 
20 years' service, crossed track near P10 in front of a
train that was about to stop. The train, which had numerous cars, pulled 
past 
the
Claimant and stopped. Shortly thereafter, the Claimant, without notifying the train
crew, crossed back across the track y crawling between o 
cars 
f the train. It
took i about ten to 1secns to cross. According to the Claimant, he`~knwthat the 
train would be 
stopping long enough to allow i to crossaly.
The Claimant was seen crossing through the train, ache incident s
reported to aaeent. Upon questioning, the Claimant admitted that he had
crawled 
throng the train without notifying the crew.
y
 
letter dated August 4 the Carrier notified the Claimant of an Investigation
into his responsibility, if any, in connection with his alleged to of the
train crew hen a went between cars on July 2, . y letter date August ,
2000 the Organization the Notice f Investigation as too vague,
 
and reqnested that the Investigation be canceled. After denying the Organization's
 
request to cancel the Investigation, the Carrier conducted, an.., Investigation ow
August 11, 00 . In a letter ate September r 8, 2000 the., Carrier notified the
Claimant t e s being place o probation for one year and s in issue a
.30-day record suspension for violating the arrie'intnne  y Operating
 
Form 1  ward . 3727
 
age 3 Docket N. - 754
    
04-3®2-3-7
Rule 1.3.1 and Maintenance of Way SafetY ul-13.1.1, which 
provides 
in
pertinent 
part:
  
hen 
a crew 
member is required 
to go between 
or 
work 
on the 
end
 
of equipment, he/she 
must notify 
the engineer 
and all 
other 
crew
 
members who could affect movement 
of the equipment radio or
 
hand signal.".
 
The Organization, appealed the discipline in a letter dated September 2 ,
2000. In response, the Carrier denied the appeal in a certified letter dated
November 7 that was not mailed 
to 
the Organization until November 21, 2000®
s threshold matter, the Organization contends that its claim should b
.granted because the Carrier failed to mail its denial of the organization's original
appeal until more than 0 days after receipt of the appeal, in violation f Rule .
The record, however, shoves otherwise. The Carrier's denial letter is date
November 7 and the receipt form shows that it was mailed on ' over 21, o04b
Because the Carrier received the Organization's appeal on September 27, 
its
mailing of its denial on November 21, 2000 was within the o0-day time limitation,
The Organization also claims that, in violation f Rule (C) which requires
that the Carrier's Notice of Investigation " ust specify the charges .investigation is being held," the Carrier failed to provide the Claimant it sc
specific notice. Contrary to the Organization's' contention, however, the oar ti
that the 
notice 
adequately notified the Claimant that being chit
moving between.  cars without notifying the train crew.
 
the merits, the,. Organization argues that, because te Claimant as
unaware 'of Safety Rule S-1 .1.1, had received no training with rsect the Rule,
and moved safely between the train cars, a should not have been disciplined. h
Board disagrees. Pursuant to Maintenance f Way peratin l1.3.1, the
Claimant  s obligated thane copy of, be familiar with, and comply with all
safe, 
1, inclu ing Safety ety ~- Rule S-13.1 because the Claimant
admittedly violated Safe l-13.1.1, the, 
oar 
t reject t the Organization's
Argument that 
h"safely" t between the two train cars. The fact that he  
ile
to otifte train crew that a teas crossing between the car d is actions
Forte 1  Award o® 37272
Pale Docket o. -376
   
0-3-0-3-7
inherently unsafe., Indeed, his crossing between the cars without notifying the train
crew 
subjected him to 
possible 
serious injury or death.
ecause the 30-day r
B, ecord suspension 
and 
one-year probation appropriately
reflected 
the seriousness of the use violation and the Claimant's senrity and prior
record, the 30-day record suspension and one-year probation were not unduly harsh
or excessive. .
AWARD
Claim denied:
ORDER
This hoard, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders
that an A,arfavorable to the Claimants) not be made.
NATIONAL L  ADJUSTMENT
BOARD
y Order of Third Division
ate at Chicago, Illinois, this day of November 4.