PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0. 2960
· AWARD N0. 76
CASE N0. TT9
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
and
Chicago & North Western Transportation Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(T) The sixty (60) day suspension assessed Trackman Phillip J.
Metoyer for allegedly sleeping an duty was without just
and sufficient cause and on the basis of an unproven
charge. (Organization File 9D-3122; Carrier File D-1117-415).
(2) TrackmanjPhillip J. Metoyer shall have his record cleared
of this incident and be compensated for all wage loss
suffered. '
OPINION OF THE BOARD:
This Board, upon the whole record and all of the evidence, finds
and holds that the Employe and the Carrier in this dispute are respectively Employe and Carrier within the meaning of the Railway Labor
Act, as amended, and that the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
On June T4, 1982, the Carrier directed the following letter to the
Claimant:
"You are directed to appear for formal investigation as indicated
. below:
PLB.NO. 2960
Award No. 76
Case No. 119
Date: Monday, June 21st, 1982
Time: 11:00 a.m.
Place: Proviso Roadmaster's Office - 301 W. Lake Street,
Northlake, Illinois
Charge: To determine your responsibility in connection with your
sleeping white on duty on June 11, 1982 at approximately
12:45 P.M. at the east end of Kaplan Yard.
"You may be accompanied by one or more persons and/or representatives of your own choosing subject to the provisions of applicable
scheduled rules and agreements; and you may, if you so desire,
produce witnesses in your awn behalf without expense to the Transportation Company."
Subsequent to the investigation, the Claimant was assessed the discipline now an appeal before the Board.
After reviewing the transcript, it is the conclusion of the Board
that there is substantial evidence to support the Carrier's finding of
guilt. A witness testified that he observed the Claimant min a sitting
position with his face down. A couple of times his face went "up and
down" and he could see the Claimant was sleeping. At one point, the
witness reported that the Claimant's face almost hit his knees. The
witness observed the Claimant for about ten minutes. The Claimant's
testimony offered in his defense failed to overcome that of the witness.
The remaining question is whether a 60-day suspension is
appropriate. Based on the seriousness of the offense and the
Claimant's past record, it is the conclusion of the Board that the
penalty is not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable.
AWARD:
The Claim is denied.
- 2-
PLB No. 2960
Award
No. 76
Case No.
119
i MVernon, Chairman
kb
Luw0j.,
H.
G.
Harper, Ewp loge Member . raw for , arrier member