Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

THIRD DIVISION

Award No. 43165 Docket No. SG-43658 18-3-NRAB-00003-160320

The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Peter R. Meyers when award was rendered.

(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (

(BNSF Railway Company

STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

"Claim on behalf of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the BNSF Railway Company:

Claim on behalf of R.D. O'Dell, for the removal of all discipline imposed and his personal record cleared of any mention of this matter, account Carrier violated the current Signalmen's Agreement, particularly Rules 54 and 56, when it issued the harsh and excessive discipline of a Level S (Serious) 30-day record suspension with a oneyear review period to the Claimant, without providing him a fair and impartial Investigation and without meeting its burden of proving the charges in connection with an Investigation held on September 8, 2014. Carrier violated Rule 56 when it failed to furnish the Claimant with the necessary training to perform the work which the charges stem from. Carrier's File No. 35-15-0017. General Chairman's File No. 14-050BNSF-188-SP. BRS File Case No. 15313-BNSF."

FINDINGS:

The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

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 June 21, 1934.

This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.

Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.

By notice dated May 5, 2014, the Claimant was directed to attend a formal hearing on charges that the Claimant allegedly had violated Carrier rules in connection with a May 1, 2014, incident in which the Claimant allegedly failed to confirm track authority limits prior to allowing employees to foul or occupy the main track. The Investigation was conducted, after three postponements, on September 8, 2014. By letter dated October 7, 2014, the Claimant was notified that as a result of the hearing, he had been found guilty as charged and was being assessed a Level S thirty-day record suspension, as well as a one-year review period. The Organization thereafter filed a claim on the Claimant's behalf, challenging the Carrier's decision to discipline him. The Carrier denied the claim.

The Carrier contends that the instant claim should be denied in its entirety because the Claimant was afforded a fair and impartial Investigation, because substantial evidence establishes that the Claimant is guilty as charged, because there is no merit to the Organization's arguments, because the Organization's requested remedy is improper, and because the discipline imposed was neither harsh nor excessive. The Organization contends that the instant claim should be sustained in its entirety because the Carrier subjected the Claimant to disparately harsh treatment, because the Carrier has failed to meet its burden of proof, because the Carrier failed to provide the Clamant with the necessary training to perform the work that gave rise to the charges, and because the discipline imposed was harsh and excessive.

The parties being unable to resolve their dispute, this matter came before the Board.

The Board has reviewed the evidence and testimony in this case, and we find that there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the finding that the Claimant was guilty of violating Carrier Rules 6.3.1 and 10.3.4 when, as the foreman in charge of gaining track authority, the Claimant failed to properly obtain that track authority. The result of his failure led to the fouling of track. The Claimant told the employees who needed the track authority that it had been approved. However, it had never been granted because the Claimant did not properly take the appropriate action. The Claimant proceeded before confirmation was received. Employees are required to be aware of all of the applicable rules and comply with them.

Once the Board has determined that there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the guilty finding, we next turn our attention to the type of discipline imposed. The Board will not set aside a Carrier's imposition of discipline unless we find its actions to have been unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious.

The Claimant in this case was guilty of a very serious rule violation. The Carrier disciplined the Claimant with a Level S thirty-day record suspension and a one-year review period. The Board cannot find that the Carrier acted unreasonably, arbitrarily, or capriciously when it issued that discipline to the Claimant. Therefore, this claim must be denied.

AWARD

Claim denied.

ORDER

This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an Award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD By Order of Third Division

Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of May 2018.