PARTIES) UNTON PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
1'O )
DISPUTE) BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim for removal of _t_he discipline of 30 demerits imposed upon section Foreman M. F. Schu_ltefor the alleged violation of Rules A, B, D, I, L and 1511--which was arbitrary, capricious, and unwarranted, on the basis of unproven charges and in violation of the Agreement. Claimant's record to be cleared of the demerits and he be compensated for any wage loss, if any, suffered.

FINDINGS: This Public Law Board No. 4338 finds.that the parties herein are Carrier and Employee within the-meaning-of the Rail-wav Labor Act, as amended, and that this Board has jurisdiction.

Tn this dispute the claimant was notified to attend an investigation on Mar.,h 10, 1986 in Marysville, Kansas. The claimant was charged with possible violation of Geppral Rules A, B,-D, I, and L and Work Procedures Rule 1511 of the Maintenance of Way and Signal Rules Book, revised April 28, 1985. Pursuant to the investigation the claimant was found guilty as charged and assessed 30 demerits.

The claimant herein was a Section F-)~reman of Gang .3204 nn thF date in ceestion. James Marksman, a sectionman, testified that on this date they had proceeded to the dump with two ties in their truck. tie stated he climbed up on the truck and started throwing these pieces off, and the pieces weighed from approximately 26 up to 60 pounds.

The Board hay studied the testimony of all the witnesses involved including the claimant. The claimant was the Section Foreman and was seated in the cab of the truck at the time the incident took place.

This incident involved Sec-tionmanJim Marksman climbing up on the truck- T'sis employ-.,e picked tip one piece of ti- approx·-mately two feet long and commenced to sling it when it splintered on both ends, and a splinter on one end caught on the palm of his right glove, and he was thrown through the air and landed on his back behind the trick.

The testimony of record establishes that there was no assistance
or directions the clai-_.ant could -have, given to Mr. Marksman or
the other -mployees in disposing of or dumping of the ties and
parts thereof The testimony indicates that claimant instructed
the employees to dump the ties and cautioned them to be careful
in so doing.

                                            Award No. 6

                                            Page 2


There is substantial-testimony regarding the fact that claimant was in the cab of the truck at the time of the incident. Evidance indicates-the claimant was filling out a report.

'there is a great deal of testimony in the record that there were other means of removing the ties from the truck, but there is no evidence that the employees or the claimant had been notified not to perform this work in the manner in which the task was actually accomplished.

It was also suggested that it might be a safer manner to have parked the truck in a different location. This all may well be true, but the evidence does not establish that the claimant violated the rules of the Carrier or was negligent in any manner.

Under the circumstances herein the discipline assessed will be set aside and the claimant will be compensated for any wage loss.

AWARD: Claim sustained as per above.

ORDER: The Carrier is directed to comply with this award within thirty days from the date of this award.

                              Preston 3'. Moore, Chairman


                              union Member


                              Carrier Member


Dated: November 10, 1987