BEFORE
PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 5263
IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION BFTWEE'M
THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD ) AWARD NO. 716
COMPANY (Formerly CNWj )
CASE NO. 124
1
AND ) Suspension
or
Engineer
E. C, Smith
5
THE UNITED TRANSPORTATION
UNION a6g6_528--4i-E
} CNWT: 02-95-486
CLAIM:
Claim of Engineer E. C. South, for the removal of trn (10)
days actual suspension from his pereonal record. and that
he be compensated for any and all last time, including any
deferred suspension served, plus ttnx spent attcnding art
iovcstigation held on February 22, 1995, when charged
with art alleged responsibility in connection with his Failurc
to prWcrly perform his duties, when observed not wearing
eve protection at approximately 0510, February 18,1995,
ai Janesville, while employed ze Engineer. Job 11 on duty
2300, Febmary 17, 1995,;tt Janesville, WI,
FINDINGS:
This Board, upon the whole record and all of the evidence. finds that the parties
herein
arc the
Carrier and the Eanployces within
the
meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended; that
this
Board is duly constituted by Agreement dated May 6.1991. and has jurisdiction over the paftieA
and the
subject
matter.
Oft February 17, 1'395, Grievant was employed as an bnginccr at the Canier's Jancsv·iile Yard.
Ile was olzwrved by the Terminal Superintendent to he working without his safety glasses, and
was assessed a tcrt day suspension as a result.
'OjB iu, . 5;io
~wP NO·
1(b
Smith Suspension
p=0e 2
The record wtablishcs that Grievant was working without his safety glasses. Thus. discipline was
appropriate- The record also establishes that anothcremployee, Foreman Bumcne, also was not
wearing his safety gia"es at that tithe- Foreman Burneuc did not receive a formal investigation or
asuspcnsion- Instead, according to testimony from the Superintendent:
Mr. kiurneuc was issued a verbal reprimand and a
computerised T3 Efficiency Test was entered for
his failure to wear safety glaues.
Thcre is no showing in the record to justify the disparate trcatmeat between Grievant and Forctnan
Burnette. Both were guilty of the game offense at the. same time, but received significantly d7Lfferentdiscipline. If Grievant had received prior warnings or disctpttttc for failing to wear safety
glasses, that discrepancy would be appropriate- However, there is no such showing to the record.
Accordingly, we will reduce Grievant's discipline to that amessed to the amount of discipline assessed to Foreman 13urnette
AWARD: -'
The discipline is reduced as described above, and the Grievant is to be reimbursed for wages lost,
less any outside earnings.
? ~ohnson
~ut] I
ut] ember
C. R. Wise David R. Haack
Carrier Member Employee Mcmher
naffed: