AWARD No. 81 DOCKET No. 97 PARTIES TO DISPUTE: Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes and Illinois Central Gulf Railroad Company

Claim on behalf of Trackman Harold Sykes to be returned to service with all rights unimpaired and to be paid for each day he is forced to miss as a result of being dismissed following an investigation held on June 12, 1984. OPINION OF THE BOARD

The Claimant was notified of an investigation for allegedly striking a Foreman in the face and being otherwise insubordinant. Subsequent to the investigation he was dismissed from service: The record demonstrates that there was certain conflict between the Claimant and his Foreman concerning his status on June 4, 1984. The Claimant made some unfortunate remarks to a Supervisor concerning Foreman Johnsonand the the Claimant was warned to desist from further derogatory comments and threats. When Johnson joined the Supervisor and the Claimant in discussion, further conversation was conducted concerning the preceding day, at which time, according to Johnson, the Claimant swung at the Foreman, hitting him on the left cheek. In addition, the Claimant threw a rock at the Foreman and the Foreman narrowly' missed falling off of the raiirod. The Supervisor was not present during the immediately above described events but another Trackman (Ghrist) witnessed the event.

In addition to the testimony of the Foreman, Trackman Ghrist testified and confirmed that the Claimant swung at Johnson on the left side of Johnson's head. He also referred to the fact that the Claimant swung at Johnson a second time. Ghrist also

PLB-2366 -2- Award No. 81

observed the rock throwing incident and he testified that the Claimant had subsequent discussions with him in which he recognized the severity of his conduct. During the investigation the Claimant denied guilt but conceded that some potentially menacing comments were made. Although the Claimant indicated that the Foreman was the instigator, he did concede that he swung his fist at him although he indicates that it is possible that the Foreman scratched his own face in an effort to make it appear that he had been assaulted. Moreover; he testified that his frustration caused him to throw a rock at the track which may have bounced toward the Foreman.


in conflict with those reached by the individuals who took the testimony. Here, not only
 did the Foreman testify but a Trackman confirmed that testimony, and a Supervisor
 indicated the general frame of mind of the Claimant immediately prior to the incident.
 In contradiction to that testimony, the Claimant states that the Supervisor pray have
 been the aggressor and that he probably scratched his own face. There is absolutely no
 evidence of record,that would warrant us to attempt to substitute our judgment for that
 of the Carrier in this case and we have no alternative but to deny the claim.


The parties herein are Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended




PLB-2366 -3- Award No. 81

 AWARD
L Claim denied.

 i


oseph A. Sickles an and Neutral M em r

H. G. Harper
 Organization Member