PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 5850
Award No.
Case No. 241
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (Former
(ATSF Railway Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
:
1. The Carrier violated the Agreement on March 15, 2002; when,
without sufficient reason, it disqualified the Claimant, Mr. T. D.
Barber, from working a Foreman's position on the Kansas 700
Seniority District; after 2 occasions in which the Carrier alleges the
Claimant placed slow orders In the wrong locations.
2. As a consequence of the violation referred to in part (1), the Carrier
shall restore all Claimant's Foreman seniority rights, remove any
mention of this incident from the Claimant's personal record, and
make him whole for ail wages and benefits lost account of this
incident
FINDINGS
Upon the whole record and ail the evidence, the Board finds that the parties
herein are carrier and employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as
amended. Further, the Board is duly constituted by Agreement, has jurisdiction of the
Parties and of the subject matter, and the Parties to this dispute were given due notice of
the hearing thereon.
Claimant was working as a Foreman when, on March 15, 2002, he advised the
Roadmaster that he had made a mistake with a slow order, but that he had caught the
error and corrected k verbally. According to Claimant, he first placed the slow order
between 889.4 to 889.5 when it should have between 898.4 to 898.5.
Page 2
Award No.
Case No. 241
The second incident occurred three months earlier when Claimant was called to
go out and check the track at a crossing where a train/car accident occurred.
Claimant contended he went to start the company truck but it would not start He
tried jumping the battery with his own car but he ran his battery down. He did not
Inspect the accident sib, but simply placed a slow order for the area of the accident
When asked if he never got to the accident site whet prompted him to issue a slow
order without actually Inspecting the site, and his reasoning was that several trains had
already crossed the site since the accident occurred so that ire thought the slow order
would be sufficient
It later developed at the Investigation that he just assumed several trains had
passed. He never confirmed this fact
slow orders are issued to cover sections of track where the track has been
disturbed by section people or at accident sites to protect trains and employees in the
event the track is not safe for
traffic.
Claimant did correct his own mistake in the December incident and related his
error to his Supervisor. About both incidents he was candid in his reasons for the errors.
The discipline process can be viewed as a means to correct an employee's
wayward ways, or as an example to others. In this instance, this Board believes the
disqualification
of
Claimant as a Foreman has impressed Claimant with his absolute need
to follow the Rules. His position as Foreman is to protect those whom he supervises as
well as himself and the Carrier's property.
His Foreman's rights are reinstated but there is no pay for time lost Claimant
must understand this is strike two and one more such infraction of the Rules can very
Page 3 Award No.
Case No. 241
well lead to permanent loss of his Foreman's rights or even loss of seniority.
AWARD
Claim sustained in accordance with the Findings.
ORDEg
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that
an award favorable to the Claimant(s) be made. The Carrier Is ordered to make the
award effective on or before 30 days following the date the award is adopted.
Robert L Hicks, Chairman & Neutral Member
Rick B. ehrli, Labor Member VVIIliarn L Yack, Carrier "ber
Dated: ~-( ~ -I
C'~