STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant was charged with:

After investigation and hearing, Claimant was ultimately suspended for five days.

 Claimant, a qualified crane operator, was operating a crawler crane which was situated on a carrier car. E-7r. DeSalvo, the foreman, was sitting on the car while Claimant was performing "ditching" work with the crane. The engine crew jerked the train causing the crane to move. and the movement caught the leg of Mr. DeSalvo on the boom cable "tiedowas," The accident resulted in the amputation of the leg.

 Carrier contended that the Claimant was disciplined "because he violated Safety Rules 3400 (c) and 3410 which was the proximate cause of injury to a fellow employee. The Carrier submits that the Claimant's negligency with respect to the observance of tae above-mentioned safety rules had a causal relationship to the injuries received by a fellow employee of the Claimant."

                                            /~ _. l

        "3400. The followin ; shall govern :with respect its . . ; , _-

        to being on, riming on or performing maintenance

        or repair work on hoistir2equipment, or the car I`3. R. A. 3.

        on which it is mounted: ,,`ADPA. OFFICE`

        s

        a

P L @, .566


- AcJa.rc~6


                            _z_


        (c) The operator must assign such employees a riding location that will permit them to be in his view at all times and also to maintain hand holds, He must be prepared to stop, if necessary to protect them

        and assure himself that they are off the equipment and -

        car before operating hoisting equipment." ,


        "3410. ~


            "Operating or moving hoisting equipment if

        any person is in a position that he is likely to,

        be caught by any part of the load or the equip

        ment, or carrying load over workmen, is prohibited.`


Carrier, essentially, takes the position that since Ciainant operating the boom while Mr. D2Salvo was positioned under the boom au3 Claimant did not order Mr. DeSalvo off the car, Claimant shared :ia the responsibility of the injury to Mr. DeSalvo when the train jerked causing the crane to move.

 The Board does not agree, teen assuming that the above-quoted safety rules were violated, it is palpably clear that such violation was not the proximate cause of ::r, DeSaIvo's injury. The cause of the accident was the jerking motion of the train which in turn propelled the crane back and forth on the carrier car.

 Obviously, if Mr. DeSaIvo was not on the carrier car, the accident would not have occurred. It also follows that if .r, DeSalvo had not been working that dap, the accident would not have occurred. Basic, well-settled principles of negligence law require a skewing of a causal connection between . the violation of the rule and the injury, and such connection must be proximate. There is no such showing in this dispute.

 AWARD: The claim is sustained, Order date is 30 Says from the date

 of this award.

                PUBLIC LXvq BOARD NG, 566


                /s/ Nicholas H. Zumas


              Nicholas 11. Zumas, Chairman


    /s/ rl. J. Cunningham /s/ S. J. W31s)n


A. J. Cunningham, Employe _an'~er S. J. Wilson, Carrier Member

 Signed and dated at Philadelphia, canna. December 18, 1970