PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO 2960 AWARD NO. 81
CASE N0. 96
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
- Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
and
Chicago and North Western Transportation Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The ten (10) day deferred suspension assessed Machine
Operator D. G. Weik for his alleged responsibility in a
motor vehicle collision was without just and sufficient
cause and on the basis of an unproven charge. (Organization File 3D-2883; Carrier File D-11-1-476).
(2) Machine Operator D. G. Weik shall be allowed the remedy
prescribed in Rule 19(d).
OPINION OF THE BOARD
This:Board, upon the whole record and all of the evidence, finds
and holds that the-Employe and Carrier involved in this dispute are re
spectively 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 February 4, 1982, the Carrier directed the Claimant to attend
an investigation. The notice read in pertinent part as follows:
"You are hereby directed to appear for a formal investigation
as scheduled below:
Date: Thursday, Febuary (sic) 11, 1982
PLB No. 2960
Award No. 81
Case No. 96
Time: 9:00 A.M.
Place: Office of the Roadmaster - Benld, Illinois
Charge: To determine your responsibility and to develop
the facts in connection with accident involving
Company vehicle #21-2953, when on Febuary (sic)
3, 1982 this vehicle operated by you was involved
in a vehicle accident near Glen Carbon, Illinois
while you were employed as a Machine Operator
on the Illinois Division.
"You
may be accompanied by one or more persons of your own
choosing subject to the applicable terms of the scheduled agreement with the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees and you
may, if you so desire, produce witnesses in your own behalf without expense to the Chicago and Northwestern System."
Subsequent to the investigation, the Carrier assessed the discipline
now on appeal before the Board. The discipline involved Rule 7, which
in part prohibits employes from "...being careless of the safety of
themselves or others ...."
The basic facts are not in dispute. The testimony brought forth
at the investigation revealed that on the morning of February 3,. 1982,
the Claimant was operating Company Truck #2T-2953 west on Glen Carbon
Road when the van in front of him, owned by Holiday Cleaners of -
Edwardsville, came to a stop at the intersection of Route 157. The
roads were apparently slippery on that date due-to a recent snowfall,
and the Claimant was unable to stop his vehicle before striking the
rear of the van at the intersection. Though no damage was sustained by
the Company truck, both rear doors of the Holiday Cleaners vehicle were
damaged.
It has often been stated that the simple fact that an accident has
occurred does not per se dictate that the employe involved was negligent or at fault. In this respect, the icy road =is definitely a
mitigating factor. However, there is enough other evidence to convince
_2_
PLB No. 2960
Award No. 81
Case No. 96
the Board that the accident could have been avoided on the Claimant's
part by exercising more care.
Both the Claimant and his witness each testified that they were
fully aware of the poor road conditions and had, in fact, been following that particular vehicle for a considerable distance. The
Claimant also testified he had stopped twice behind the van-without
incident. Based on this, the slippery conditions were no surprise to
the Claimant and he should have exercised more care. We also note that
he was vague and evasive in response to questions as to how far back he
had been following the other vehicle. In the Board's opinion, these
factors, taken into consideration with the record as a whole, constitute substantial evidence.
AWARD:
In view of the foregoing, the Claim is denied.
I
Vernon, Chairman
LJU
H.
U.
Harper, Member .. raw or arr er em er
Dated: