PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0. 1582
PARTIES) THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY
TO )
DISPUTE) BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim in behalf of Trackman Ray Pex Girard
for reinstatement with seniority, vacation and all other benefits
unimpaired and pay for wage loss with interest at the rate of six
percent per annum, beginning September 7, 1979 continuing forward.
FINDINGS: TILis lpublic Law Board No. 1582 finds that the parties
Zerein are Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway
Labor Act, as amended, and that this Board has jurisdiction.
In this dispute the.claimant was working at the Centralized Rail
Welding Plant in Amarillo, Texas. At approximately 10:00 a.m. he
received a message that his wife had an emergency. The foreman
was instructed to advise the claimant that it was not the practice
at the plant to deliver personal messages.
The superintendent then inquired as to the nature of the emergency.
The foreman reported back that the claimant stated it wasn't any of
the superintendent's business what the emergency was. The superintendent decided to check into the matter and proceeded to the location where the claimant was left by the foreman.
Upon the superintendent's arrival, he found the claimant talking on
the telephone. The superintendent told the claimant to bang up the
phone, and the Carrier alleges the claimant refused to do so. The
superintendent then took the receiver from the claimant's grasp and
hung up the telephone.
The superintendent then inquired who the claimant was talking to and
was advised he was talking with his Uniou General Chairman. A verbal
altercation ensued which ended with the claimant returning to work.
Shortly thereafter the claimant informed the superintendent that his
shoulder was hurting which had been caused when the superintendent
took the telephone receiver from him.
The claimant thereafter returned to the office and filled out Form
1421 (on job injury). After the claimant had filled out the form,
he was
called into
the superintendent's office and given notice to
attend an investigation. Pursuant to the investigation the claimant was discharged for violation of Rules 14, 16 and 19 of the General Rules for the Guidance of
Employees. The
claimant was later
Award No. 145
Page 2
reinstated to service on February 27, 1980 with the understanding
that the organization could progress the claim for time lost.
The Organization contends that the superintendent grabbed the
claimant by his arm and jerked the receiver from his hand, and
further that when the claimant stated his arm was hurting and
requested to be taken to a doctor, he was instead taken before
the superintendent who allegedly became enraged and again engaged
in a verbal altercation with the claimant.
The claimant was taken to a doctor for examination, and the doctor
stated he could find no evidence of an injury but that the claimant
was experiencing minor muscle spasms.
s
Rules 14, 16 and 19 are at issue herein. The claimant was guilty
of not hanging up the telephone when so instructed by the superintendent. However, the superintendent's conduct thereafter is no
better than that of the claimant and was certainly not justified
under the circumstances.
The superintendent was just as guilty of a violation of Rule 16
as was the claimant. For that reason it is the opinion of the
Board that the blame in this case must be shared. Under the evidence herein, the Board finds that the discipline herein is excessive, and the Carrier is directed to pay the claimant for time
lost commencing November 8, 1979 through and including February
26, 1980.
AWARD: Claim sustained as per above.
ORDER: The Carrier is directed to comply with this award within
L~rty days from the date of this Award.
.err
'Preston J.:·~ipcre," G iairman
Dated August 1g, 1980
Zte
a iza iou
I~lem
er
1~5
a. L~-_
Carrie 'gem be r