PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0. 1760
Award No. 154

 Case No. 154
 File MW-DECK-93-11

 Parties Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
 to and
 Dispute Norfolk & Western Railway Company

 Statement
 of Claim: Claim on behalf of R. Courage requesting that he be
 reinstated to service and paid for time lost, as a result of
 his dismissal from all service following formal
 investigation held on October 19, 1993, in connection with
 his conduct unbecoming an employee involving a criminal
 charge of aggravated battery.

 Findings: This Board has jurisdiction of this case by reason of
 the parties Agreement establishing the Board therefor.
 Claimant, R. Courage, a Trackman, was off sick for
 several years. He returned to service therefrom and was
 given a physical examination as well as a background check
 because of his absence. That background check uncovered an
 incident which caused the Carrier to issue a formal notice
 of investigation.
 The charge placed against the employee in part read:

" ..your conduct unbecoming an employee in that you have been charged in the Circuit Court for the 6th Judicial Circuit of Illinois, Macon County Illinois with the offense of aggravated battery in that you stabbed Deborah Courage in the side, leg, and arm with a knife on or about March 20, 1993."


The investigation was finally held on October 19, 1993 and the Carrier concluded from the evidence adduced that the Claimant was culpable of the charges. He was dismissed from all services as discipline therefor.


Claimant was accorded the due process to which entitled under his discipline rule.


There was sufficient evidence adduced including the admissions of the Claimant, to support the conclusions of culpability of the Carrier. The Claimant had been found guilty by a jury of aggravated battery. He was sentenced on




        July 16, 1993 to two years probation and restitution plus court costs.


        The BMWE properly raised several factors on the Claimant's behalf, i.e., that the incident did not occur while the Claimant was on duty, that there was no notoriety, nor did the employees complain that they were fearful of working with the Claimant, that the incident was not mentioned in the newspaper and the incident had no effect on the shippers, therefore, there was no harm to the Carrier's image or reputation.


        Such factors cannot be given weight in light of the nature of the incident for which the Claimant was disciplined. The use of a knife as a weapon to do harm places the Carrier on notice that as an employer they hold a responsibility to all employees to provide a safe work environment. Hence, when the nature of the incident is criminal in nature, that fact must be considered in light of the Carrier responsibility to all its employees. The Claimant's previous dismissal for insubordination and threats to his supervisor, add more weight to the Carrier's problem. The Carrier would be acting less than responsible concerned were its decision to be to the contrary. The Carrier could be held liable by any employee who might be injured thereafter.


        The discipline imposed in the circumstances of this case is not unreasonable. This claim will be denied.


Award: Claim denied.

    . Hammons, r.'Woyee Member E. N. Jac , Jr., Ca r r Member

                                            v


                  Arthur T. Van Wart, Chairman and Neutral Member


Issued July 30, 1994.