Parties to the Dispute
PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 3765

BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF

WAY EMPLOYEES




GRAND TRUNK WESTERN RAILROAD

COMPANY


STATEMENT OF CLAI1
I wish to appeal the decision rendered in the case of Mr. L.C. Bancroft--Track Foreman, who was issued discipline in the form of "Disqualification as Foreman on C.A.T. Gangs."

 I request the disqualification be rescin ded and the discipline be removed from Mr. Bancrofts personal record.

 OPINION OF THE BOARD
Case No. 52

 L.C. Bancroft, the claimant, is~employed by Carrier as
 a Track Foreman. At the time of the incident that gave rise
 to this case, he was assigned as Foreman of the Continuous
 Action Tamper (CAT) in Flint, Michigan. He was directed to
 surface two different tracks: the number one and the



number two pickup tracks. Carrier contends that Claimant was given written, as well as verbal, instructions to surface one track using the computer and one track manually, using the computer to only record. Claimant's force resurfaced both tracks, using the machine fully computerized. When carrier officials learned that Claimant had surfaced both tracks using the computer, they charged him as follows:

          You are hereby notified to attend a formal investigation to be held in the Pontiac Administration Building Conference Room on Monday, January 14, 1991 at 0900 hours, to determine your responsibility, if any, for failure to comply with written and verbal instructions issued concerning the surfacing method for #1 pickup track at Flint, Michigan, on December 18 and 19, 1990.


A hearing into the matter was held as scheduled. As a result of that hearing, Claimant was found guilty as charged and assessed discipline of "Disqualification as Foreman on C.A.T. Gangs."
 This Board has reviewed the record, including the transcript of the hearing, in this matter. As a result of that review, we are compelled to conclude that considerable confusion existed in the work order, as finally conveyed to
                                              3-7 (o

                                                5-~-


                          3


Claimant. There is reason to believe that Claimant did not
 knowingly disregard the orders to surface only one track
 using the computer and that he was under the impression that
 he was following instructions. Carrier acted in an arbi
 trary and capricious manner in this instance. Even if one
 were to conclude that Claimant did knowingly disregard the
 orders of a Supervisor, as Carrier asserts, disqualification
 as a Foreman of a CAT 'Gang would not be an appropriate pen
 alty.
 This Board finds no evidence in the record that supports Carrier's action in this instance. AWARD
                The claim is sustained.


R.E. Dennis,

Neutral Member


    J.A. DeRoche, K.R./M as n,

    Carrier Member E

                                Xj~ mploy'e ember


    Date of Adoption