CASE N0, 11


PARTIES 1 BWTHERHOOD OP MAINTENANCE 0$ WAY EMPLOYES
 TO ) and
 DISPUTE BURLINGTON NORTHERN (dormer Joint Texas Division]
 1
 STATEMENT 1. That the dismissal of Trackman W. C. High was in violation
 OF CLAIM: of the current Agreement, said action being arbitrary, capri
 cious and without justification based on the testimony at the
 investigation.
 2. That Claimant now be restored to the service with senior
 ity, and all other rights restored unimpaired and that he be
 compensated for all wage loss suffered during the intervening
 period.
 FINDINGS: By reason of the Memorandum of Agreement signed November 16,
 1979, and upon the whole record and all the evidence, the
 Board finds that the parties herein are employe and Qrrier within the meaning
 of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, and that it has jurisdiction.

 Trackman W. C. High, with an employment date of November 21, 1980, was dismissed from service of Carrier on August 9, 1982, for violation of Rules 19, 563, 564, 570, 573, 585 and 589 of Burlington Northern Safety Rules, in connection with an altercation resulting in injury to a fellow employee on Monday, July 12, 1982, near the depot at Tomball, Texas; failure to report promptly a personal injury allegedly sustained while on duty as Trackman on Extra Gang No. 1, Tomball, Texas, Monday, July 12, 1982; for absenting himself without proper authority'from. his position of Trackman, Extra Gang No. 1., Thursday, July 15, 1982, and for threatening Foreman David Brooks with bodily harm and harassing him with abusive langauge in the vicinity of his home at Teague, Texas, about 10:45 p.m., Wednesday, July 14, 1982, as evidenced by formal investigations held Wednesday, July 21, 1982, and concluding investigation held on July 27, 1982, at Teague, Texas.

 The first of the incidents involved occurred at approximately I:30 P.M., July 12, 1982, when claimant entered into altercation and attacked a fellow employee, Trackman F. R. Johnson, with a pair of tie tongs inflicting puncture wounds which resulted in secondary infection and loss of four days work by Trackman Johnson. Following proper notification to attend investigation called to ascertain and develop the facts surrounding the incident, claimant failed to appear at the hearing held 1:00 P.M., July 21, 1982. The testimony adduced at the hearing was uncontroverted.. The evidence of record supports a finding that claimant violated BN Safety Rules 19, 563 and 564.
 ~~ B ~53~
 PLB - 2535 AWARD N0. 11 (page 2)

                                    CASE N0. 11


              A second investigation was held at 4:00 P.M. on Julv 21, 1982

(concluded on July 27, 1982) regarding incidents on dates of July 14, 15 and 16, 1982, for which claimant was found in violation of BN Safety Rules 19, 563, 564, 570, 573, 585 and 589, and dismissed on August 9, 1982. Claimant was absent from the concluding investigation held on July 27, 1982. Hereinbelow is account of incidents involved:

 On July 14, 1982, claimant was involved in an incident with his f6reman, Mr. D. F. Brooks, and was charged with tfireatening Foreman Brooks with bodily harm and harassing him with abusive langauge in the vicinity of the foreman's home at Teague, Texas. Testimony reveals that Claimant paid a visit to Foreman Brooks' home about 10:45 P.M. on night of July 14, 1982, under the pretense of picking up his paycheck, and instead began questioning Foreman Brooks a5 out the upcoming investigation involving the tie tong incident of July 12, 1982. Foreman Brooks then testified that claimant told him if he lost his job the foreman "would be the cause of it". Claimant then became boisterous, quarrelsome, threatening and abusive to his supervisor. The evidence is clear that Claimant was in violation of BN Safety Rules 19, 563 and 564

 On July 15, 1982, claimant was absent from duty, for which he was cited for taking leave without proper authority. Testimony into this incident is conslusive that claimant's supervisor did not know where claimant was on the date of July 15, 1982, and that no attempts were made to obtain authorization for such absence. The evidence supports claimant's violation of BN Safety Rule 570: "Employees must report for duty at the designated time and place. . . They must not absent themselves from duty, exchange duties with or substitute others in their place without proper authority."

 On July 16, 1982, claimant filed a Report of Personal Injury, Form 12504, alleging he sustained a personal injury on July 12, 1982, in his altercation with Trackman F. R. Johnson. Testimonv shows claimant's dereliction of duty when he did not promptly complete Form 12504 before his cour of duty ended on July 12, 1982. Furthermore, testimony shows claimant was dishonest in alleging he was injured on July 12, 1982, and testimony and evidence proved he failed to give a factual report of incident and injury involved.Claimant was . correctly found in violation of BN Safety Rules 573, 585 and 589.

 The evidence is clear from testimony presented, as well as from the record as a whole, that claimant was in violation of Carrier's safety rules as cited for incidents involved.
 PLB - 2535 AWARD N0. 11 (page 3)'
 CASE N0. 11

              In the opinion of the Board, the violations of Carrier's


safety rules fully warranted discipline action taken by the Carrier, especiallyywhen one considers the serious nature of the charges and claimant's short texture as an employee (less than two years service at time of dismissal). He is thereby undeserving the consideration due long time employees of the service.

                      --A W A R D


              1. The Carrier is not in violation of the Agreement.


              2. The claim of Trackman W. C. High is denied.


          JOSEPH LAZAR CHAIRMAN AND NEUTRAL MEMBER


                                  zu ~Ir


C. F. FOOSE, EMPLOYE MEMBER B. 3. MASON, CARRIER MEMBER

 DATFn·- ~.___'~ 3 /9~`f