Parties
to the
Dispute
. PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0. 3542
Pennsylvania Federation Brotherhood of
Maintenance of Way Employes
vs.
Consolidated Rail Corporation
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
(a) That Daniel C. Sequin, Bridgeand Building Inspector,
employed at Canton-Yard, Baltimore, Maryland, be restored
to service with all seniority rights and all other privy
ileo.es provided for by either agreement or past practice.
(b) That Daniel C. Sequin's record be cleared of all
charges brought against him.
OPIFIOH OF THE BOARD
Claimant D. C. Sequin is a Bridge an;! 3uiidin., Inspector
employed at Carrier's Canton Yard, Baltimore, Maryland. On February 2, 1982, Claimant was charged as follows:
Being absent from your assigned wt.rk location as
B":3 Inspector on the I-95 project at Canton Yard,
Baltimore, MD at approximately 10:00 AM on December 29, 1981.
Case No. 3
Award No. 3
two N~-3
-2-
Engaging in unauthorized--activity at Canton Yard,
I -al imore, PID Ft approximatel, 10:00 X-1
o,.-I Decein
- t
ber 29, 1951, in that you were observed on a
wooden telephone type pole.
Falsifying Conrnil Form AD?30G R5 11076, DAILY
PARTICIPATION PROJECT 2?POR:T, dated December 29, 1981.
A hearing into the natter was-held on February- 17, 1932, as
scheduled. At the conclusion of that hearing, Claimant was found
guilty as charged and dismissed frcr,i Carrier's service.. A trapscript of that hearing ha, been made a part of the record of this
case.
The Bord hgs ravieix,~d that tr=nscript as well as the other _
documents that w=:e up
elm
-racor<7
0r
~ this ccse and it must conclude
tact Claim::nt s dis:iijsal. ;;,ns not for pro: ^r c=a_^,e and w:a not
supported by the hearin, record. Con>eqnently, Cr!rrier acted arbi
trarily and capriciously and tha dismissal should be- set aside.
Claimant in this
case
is-_ i;rilge artl 'uilding Inspector
who was- 1ssi.-nod t0 work with a Contractor and t0
'.12:1:(.
s,-r-- t!izt ._
Carrier's into-rests were consid~rr.J l::?en
Ln=
Contractor's wnrk
ml'-'ht interfere -with Carrier's mission. On some? days, ClaL.`11nt~s
:ior:C load :vas sec; that I,n had litLL12 or n--t'tin- to do. ,iii r-cord ..
reveals th:t on taee-a.·.y~, heat::; cutLiri::, dfi~:n ,ibandonoi t-~iephone,
poles Lind recl:;imino thco^,).=r ·,ai:~ serun-, on those poles.
Carrier ~:(Snt^nd:: t!..t Cl-,ima:a
<rl:~iG-G:-::
t';.:cl:;rde., t~g._i:ist
- PLB No. 3542
Case No.
3
Award No.
3
-S-
and that the penalty of dismissal is therefore appropriate. This
' Board is not persuaded, however, that Claimant was engaged in illegcl
acts when cited on December 29, and 30, 1931.
A careful reading of the transcript should persuade any unbiased observer that the Project Director was fully aware of the way
Claimant worked and knew what he was doing with the telephone poles
and the copper wire. Claimant's story, as well as that of witness
Nelson, is believable. A careful analysis of the Director's testimony
also points up the fact that he was aware of what Claimant was doing.
This Board is persuaded that Claimant was the scapegoat in
this situation, that he was performing his duties in a competent
manner, and that his Supervisor was fully aware of what he was doing-and cordoncd it. The Su;·.ervisor's testimony at the hearing was
selfservin;_ evasive, not responsive on occasion, and clearly designed to protect his own position.
Carrier has acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner in
this instanco and this claiT, should be sustained. -
AWARD
The claim is sustained. Carrier is directed
to rcinstate Claimant to his former position
with pay for all. lost tine in accordance with
Rule
27.
Carrier shall implement this award
within 30 days of its adoption.
. ~~.3 w6 . 3
.5'(1--
~Q-cvl~ ,vo .3
fP_ ~-
~~
71;.;,
a.~=_n.^.i5,
Neutral ;1, mber
~Ajd
Dodd, r^71oyn
Meembor -R. WNieil. Carrier ,'ember