Upon the whole record and alt the evidence, the Board finds that the parries herein are carrier and employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as amended. Further, the Board is duty constituted by Agreement, hag jurisdiction of the Parties ant! of the subject matter, and the Parties to his dispute were given due notice of the hearing thereon.
The basics are that on August 8, 2040, Claimant apparently slipped on a loose stone in the ballast and twisted his kites. Claimant's injury was not witnessed by anyone that s:w iris fail, but others saw hire laylnig on the ground. Me pot up with assistance. advised the Foreman he thought he was slri0ht. He did net request to see a doctor.
That evening he contacted his foreman and related he had wren a doctor who advised him to stay oft his fret until their next appointment. The next morning, the Foreman relayed Cialmanrs condition to his Supervisor who In turn reported to his Supervisor.
Claimant at this paint, had not completed an "EMPLOYEE PERSONAL ihWURYIOCCUPATIONAL ILLNESS REPORT" so a Roadmasbar :red an Assistant Roadnwstaer went to Claimant's home after receiving prier approval to do so, seeking Claimant"s cooperation to completing the Injury report and one other document. Claimant asked that the forms be left and he would fill them out as he stated he wonted to take his time to assure what he said was correct The Roadmaater agreed, allowing Claimant a 24 hour window and Instructing Claimant to complete the forma and advise either one of them who then would retrieve the documents from Claimant.
Claimant did not return the forms to either Roadmastsr within 24 boon, but he did mail same to the Division Engineer. Thus, the charges as set forth earlier to this Award.
Claimant admitted he knew of the Rules requiring his IlIng of on Injury report No area knew that the Carrier did Investigate each injury in an effort to perhaps correct the manner in which work was done, to altar policy, to perhaps even rewrite safety rules, oft.
Pace 3 I1WOPd No. 1 '7Nevertheless, Claimant was reluctant to cooperate at the outset, thwarting Carrier's efforts to determine what happened.
according to the Organization was too broad In application that the doctor or any doctor knowing of Claimant would be free to divulge a medical history going beyond the claimed injury.
The Organization argued that Claimant advised the visiting Roadmastars that the release of medical Information as protected by the Ruins 4f Discovery and wet Illegal since Claimant had advised them he was being represented by an attorney.
This Board' e authority is eel faith in the Railway Labor Act and it authorizes Neutrals only to interpret and apply mutually agreed to Rubs and Understandings. K the Information naught was improper far some legal reason, that is safely a ratter for a forum other than the cane before this Beard.
The requirements of Immediately reporting an injury and completing the prescribed form to known to Claimant in lieu of notifying either Raadmaster that he fled the report with the Division Engineer, he kept silent. Ha did complete the report, but the Carrier was not aware until August 11, 2000, when the Division Engineer recelpt$d for the report of the how, wham and where Claimant sustained the injury.
There was some discussion whether Claimant had 72 haute to ltla his report, as that is the advice he received from the Foreman but chat advice flows only td the sa callad first aid report covering hruia*s, contussionsi atc., that are not serious enough to result in lost time,
Patio 4 Award No.
1'i(0 01104' NO. 118Attar reviewing all the written material and the transcript, It is evident that Claimant did not cooperate with the Retedmastcrs in determining the material facts of how the injury occurred and failed to timely 11b and Injury report as Instructed. But there b no penalty for his alleged faifurs to complete the so-called medical release lbrm that was not furnished as evidence in the Investigation.
Claimant had 29 years with the Carrier as of the date of injury with no disciplinary problem since October, 1981. Under tha circumstances, the discipline ass is reduced to a written reprimand eliminating therefrom any reference to a second form. !f Claimant lost any time as a result of this claim, he is to be compensated as provided to the Schedule Agreement.
This hoard, afbar consideration of the dispute Identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(*) be made. The Carrfir 1s ordered to make the
