Parties
to the
Dispute
PUBLIC LAW BOARD N0. 3765.
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES
VS.
GRAND TRUNK WESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
The decision of the Carrier to dismiss Claimant
D. L. Tyner for alleged violation of General
Rule E of the Grand Trunk Operating Rules was
unwarranted and on the basis of unproven charges.
Claimant Tyner shall be reinstated with seniority and all other rights unimpaired and he shall
be compensated for all wage loss suffered as a
result of the above referred to dismissal.
OPINION OF THE BOARD
Claimant D. L. Tyner was assigned as a Trackman at Pontiac, Michigan. Because Claimant's pay check was not available for him on July
23, 1987, he became agitated and began arguing with his Supervisor
about the situation.
AS
a result of the confrontation between Claimant
Case No. 30
374
5-'20
and numerous supervisors, he was taken out of service and charged as
follows:
To determine your responsibility, if
any, for violation of Grand Trunk
Operating Rules.
General Rule E
They (employees) must be of good moral
character and must conduct themselves
at all times, whether on or off Company
property in such manner as not to bring
discredit upon the Company.
Any act of hostility or willful disregard of the Company's interest will not
be condoned.
When on Thursday, July 23, 1987, at approximately 0945 hours you allegedly were Insubordinate, showed disrespect and did give
verbal threat to an officer of the railroad
company.
A hearing into the matter was held. As a result of that hearing,
Claimant was found guilty as charged and dismissed from Carrier's service.
This Board has reviewed the record and can only conclude that
Claimant did in fact act in an aggressive, threatening, insubordinate
manner. No company can condone an employe using foul language to a
supervisor, outwardly disobeying him and threatening him. Carrier
need not continue in its employ such people. Claimant has noone to
blame for this situation but himself. Carrier officials made every
attempt to persuade Claimant to finish out his work day and assured
3-,
(,s
-3
-S-
him that his check would be available the next day. He did not
properly respond to Carrier's efforts. He took this path at his own
peril.
AWARD
The claim is denied.
Ar
_4-D
R. t! Dennis, Neutral Member
cap
a.
~d-AL-Q~
Jo. . DeRoche, C rrier Member W.~. aRue, Employe Member
3-8- 90
Date of Adoption