PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0, .2206
AWARD No. 17
CASE N0. 23
PARTIES TO THE DISPUTE:
Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees
and
Burlington Northern, Inc.
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The dismissal of Laborer S. Goodman was without just and
sufficient cause and wholly disproportionate to the alleged
offense. (System File 15-3 :V-20, 2/28/78B)
(2) Laborer S. Goodman be returned to service, compensated for
all time lost and the dismissal be stricken from his record."
OPINION OF
BOARD:
day,
The Claimant in this case is the same individual whose thirtyX(30)
suspension was upheld in our Award No. 16 (Case
No.
22). On September 29,
1977, after the hearing which resulted in the suspension but prior to
notification of that suspension, Claimant was held out of service and
received Notice to attend another hearing and investigation into another
set of charges as follows:
Attend investigation in the Conference Room, Freight
House No. 9, 5405 West 26th Street, Cicero, Illinois,
at 8:00 A.M., Thursday, October 6, 1977, for the purpose
of ascertaining the facts and determining your responsibility in connection with your allegedly being quarrelsome and insubordinate and failing to comply with
instructions from vour Foreman at about 8:30 A.M. and
11:30 A.M. on September 29, 1977.
1
_ a
ao .-
AL.u
~a
~~ 2
Arrange for representative and/or witnesses if desired
in accordance with government provisions of prevailing
schedule rules.
You are being withheld from service pending results of
this investigation.
Following the investigation Claimant was found guilty as charged and dismissed from all service effective November 1, 1977.
On September 29, 1977 the gang on which Claimant was a Section Laborer
was engaged digging jackpost holes. At about 8:30 a.m. two other Laborers
were shoveling dirt which Claimant was loosening with a pickax. Claimant
insists that he was working hard but the testimony of all other witnesses
establishes that he was talking more than he was working. The Foreman
approached and told Claimant to stop talking so much and to use the pick
ax he was holding. Careful review of the record persuades us that Claimant
responded in words or substance: "Get out of my face or I'll hit you with
this pick". The Foreman's testimony to that effect is fully corroborated
by two other employees who witnessed the confrontation. We find Claimant's
version to the contrary wholly unbelievable. Nor do we find any probative
evidence that Claimant was harrassed or provoked by his Foreman. Later on
that morning, at approximately 11:30 a. m., Claimant and the Foreman had a
conversation regarding lunch period and, according to the Foreman, Claimant
stated in words or substance: "Get off my back or I'll kill you". This
testimony is flatly contradicted by Claimant and there were no other witnesses.
But we do not find that Carrier acted arbitrarily or unreasonably in accepting
the .Foreman's version, especially in light of the proven earlier threat. We
find that Carrier has supported the charges against Claimant by substantial
record evidence and the penalty is not disproportionate given the nature of
the offense.
·~ah- A,,) 0
~~ 3
FINDINGS:
Public Law Board No. 2206, upon the whole record and all of the
evidence, finds and holds as follows:
1. that the Carrier and Employee involved in this dispute are,
respectively, Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor
Act;
2. that the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein;
and
3. that the Agreement was not violated.
AWARD
Claim denied.
v
Dana E. Eisc, n, C 'rman
FH.
Funk, Employee Member 1, Carrier Member
Date: L/~