PARTIES The Brotherhood of 'Maintenance of Way Employes
 TO
 DISPUTE and
 The Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company

 STATEMENT 1. That Carrier's decision to assess Claim-
 OF CLAIM ant Herbert Joe twenty (20) demerits after
 investigation on May 16, 1986, was unjust.
 2. That the Carrier now expunge twenty (20)
 demerits from Claimant's record, reimburs
 ing him for all wage loss and expenses in
 curred as a result of attending the Inves
 tigation May 16, 1986, because a review of
 the investigation transcript reveals that
 substantial evidence was not introduced
 that indicates Claimant is guilty of vio
 lation of rules he was charged with in the
 Notice of Investigation.
 FINDINGS

 This Board, upon the whole record and all of the evidence, finds that the parties herein are the Carrier and the Employees within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended; that this Board is duly constituted by Agreement dated November 26, 1985, and has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter.
 Z/o.;)-/ -'-

Claimant was employed by the carrier since 1977, and was working as a Welder Helper on March 26, 1986. At that time Claimant was grinding rail welds, and a foreign object entered his eye. The Claimant told his Foreman that he had something in his eye, and asked for some eye wash. The Foreman indicated that there was eye wash in the truck, and Claimant made no further reference to--the matter on that day.


That night, the Claimant was troubled by something in his eye,
 and went to the hospital. He was treated by a doctor at the hos
 pital, who allegedly removed a metal particle from his eye. The
 next morning, Claimant told his Foreman that he had been treated
 at the hospital, and that a piece of metal had been removed from
 his eye, and mentioned no further problem. Neither the Claimant-
 nor his Foreman took any further action about the matter.

 On April 17, 1986, a bill was received at the Division offices,
 indicating that Claimant Joe had been treated for an on-duty in-
 jury, and the Investigation was scheduled. Claimant was assessed
 twenty (20) demerits for failing to comply with the rules which
                PLB N0. 4021

                AWARD N0. 26

                CASE N0. 33


-3-

 require prompt reporting of all injuries, and the completion of
 certain forms. The Foreman was given a formal reprimand for his
 failure to report the injury. -

The record indicates that Claimant was wearing all the prescribed safety equipment, and no evidence was adduced that indicates that Claimant was working in an unsafe manner. The injury was minor in nature, and the Claimant and his foreman dealt with it simply and effectively. However, the Rules require that all injuries be reported promptly, and they failed to do so.


Claimant denies that he was aware of the rules which require prompt reporting, or that he ever had been provided with a rule book. He had examined a copy of the rules which were in the truck, but had not read them carefully. He felt that this was a minor matter, and only serious injuries need be reported formally. The Claimant was wrong, and the Rules specifically require that all injuries be reported promptly. After almost ten years of service with the Carrier, ignorance of the rules is not a good defense for claimant's failure to be familiar with the Rules.

However, Claimant did report the injury to his Foreman, and his
 foreman also failed to report the injury. Both the Foreman and
 the Claimant violated the rules, and it is clear that both were
 good employees - the Claimant had nearly ten years service, with
 a clear record. The Claimant received twenty demerits for his
 failure, but the Foreman received only a verbal reprimand.

 It is the opinion of the Board that the Claimant was in violation of the rules, but that the foreman's responsibility was greater, by virtue of his supervisory position. It is, therefore, inappropriate that the Claimant receive a greater penalty than his foreman. The discipline assessed against the Claimant's record will be reduced to a verbal reprimand. The twenty demerits will be expunged from Claimant's record, and the verbal reprimand will be annotated thereon.

 AWARD
Claim sustained to the extent described in the findings.
 ' PLB N0. 4021
                                            AWARD N0. 26

                                            CASE N0. 33


                            -5-


    C. F. F dose, Employee Member L. L. pope, carrier member


o nson, Chairman nd N utral Member

Dated: ~/& /S;~