PUBLIC LAW BOARD NUMBER 3530
PARTIES TO DISPUTE
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
Award Number: 114

 Case Number: 114_

 BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES

 And

 NORFOLK AND WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY

 Claimant, G.L. Walker, P.O. Box 1184, Princeton, WV 24740 and C.M. '
 Lowe, 512 McDowell Avenue, N.W. Roanoke, VA 24016 were assessed 60 day
 and 9Q day suspension respectively for alleged responsibility in -,
 connection with collision -of Auto Spikers and to promptly report
 personal injuries. Claim was filed in accordance with Railway Labor
 Act and agreement provisions. Employes request suspensions be removed
 from their record and pay for the lost time with seniority and vacation
 rights unimpaired.

 FINDINGS
Claimant lLowe entered the Carrier's service on August 26, 1981.
 C13imant Walker entered the Carrier's service on October 2, 196$_

 By letters dated July 15,-1988, Claimants were directed to attend a .formal investigation on ,charges .thap they- failed to,·promptly report the collision of.'.t{~etwo~n.;spkers they' bpgrated,.and that·thby failed to promptly,

 report personal injuries, in violation of Rule,1000.

 tion was held on August,2, 1988:. Claimant Lowe was suspended .for 90 days

 The formal investiga-

 and Claimant Walker was suspended'for 60 days..

The issue to be decided in this dispute is whether Claimants were

suspended for just_cau~-e under the Agreement; and if nof,'what should the

remedy be.

 ' On July 12 _1988,, Claimants were assigned to T&S-Pr~oduction Gang and both were 'op~ratitt~ tPiker mac~'~.bs,y Lowe, was opeYat~ng' the_ machine behind
 Walker. At"approximately 3:Obp..°m., Lowe~collided,wilth Walker. Neither
 Claimant reported the collision or their injuries on July 12:, On July 13,
 1988, both Claimanrs'reported the cdllision.and their~injurie§ to Foreman M.
 S. Shipley. On July 14, 1988, Shipley informed Assistant Roadmaster W. E.

 Cline of the collision and injuries. Shipley was'suspended for 15 days for

 his part in connebti4n·with his handling of-this~mat.ter,y.-

 The Carrier's Rule 1000 provides:

 An employee who sustains a personal injury while.on duty''-"must report it, before leaving Company premises, to his immediate supervisor or to the employee in charge of the work, who will promptly report the facts through channels. ,

 If ari·employee at any time marks off or obtaips,medical aCtention for,: an on-duty injury or occupation illness, he must promptly notify his.
 supervisor. ~ "

 Other Carrier employees and managerial personnel examined the spikers in question on July 14, 198$ and determined that there were no mechanical defects or malfunctions present in the spikers including their brakes. Testimony at the investigation by Claimants and others indicated that the spikers had had difficulty with their brakes as far back as 1987.

 Claimants were held out of service pending the investigation.

 The position of the Carrier is that Claimants were justly suspended.
 The Carrier contends that Claimants'admit they did not report either the
35 3o lIq-
collision or their injuries on July 12. The Carrier maintains that the evidence in the record demonstrates that Claimants knew of both the collision and their injuries (if they indeed occurred) immediately and deliberately failed,to report the'm,as required. -This failure constitutes clear violation of Rule 1000. Further, the Carrier contends that the reporting of damage and injuriesds essential to the operation of a safe workplace and that both'the collision and the failure to report the results were serious breaches of the Carrier's rules. These breaches justified holding,Claimants·ou't.of service, pending the investigation.. Finally, the .
 Carrier ,contends thW~the suspensions were_warranted,under the circumstan-

 ces, citing several awards to show that each was proportional

 offense. -

 to the

 The position o£ the Organization is that,Claimants were suspended without just cause; arguing that Claimants were not at fault ,in the

 collision because ~t1ip brakes were not operating properly.." It contends that.''

 li, the brakes on Lowe's spiker did not apply as quickly or securely as they should. The Organization points out that injuries such as Claimants' are not always readily apparent and sometimes develop over time. ;TherefoYe, the, Organization contends-, Claimants complied with Rule 1000, in that they

 reported their injuries as soon as they manifested themselves.

 The Organization also contends that the Carrier was not justified in holding Claimants out of service pending the investigation. In essence, the organization contends that the Carrier is asserting that every violation is a serious or major violation. The Carrier is routinely and improperly holding out of service every employee cited to an investigation.
 After review of the entire record, the Board modifies. Lowe's and Walker's, suspensions 'reducing them to 60 and 30 days respectively and directs that their back pay, benefits and seniority be restored for the balance of the period for which they were suspended.

 The Carrier has sustained its burden of proving that Claimants were involved in a collision and that they did not report that collision or any related injuries on the day of the collision. There is no question that Claimants failed to report injury until July 13, 1988, at which time they advised their foreman. However, the testimony cited by the Carrier as proving that Claimants knew immediately of their injuries is in fact somewhat inconclusive on that issue. As to the collision, there is no excuse for failing to promptly report this. It is of vital importance that the Carrier learn of the collision promptly so that it,can take steps to protect the safety of its personnel and the public regardless of whether the collision resulted froin.faulty brakes;, or any other reason.

 While not ignoring the seriousness of the offense committed, the Board finds that the suspensions were not , entirely in proportion to Claimants' transgressions. Considering the~facts and circumstances of this matter the more, appropriate disposition is.the reduction of the. suspensions.

 AWARD
Claim disposed of-'per Findings herein.
 Neutra tuber,

 t Carrier Member

 Organization Member