BEFORE PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 6043
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES
and
ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY
Case No. 3
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood
that:
1. The Agreement was violated when the Carrier disciplined
Welder Helper T. M. Kaminski on February 12, 1996 without
a fair and impartial investigation pursuant to Rule 33 (Carrier's
File 268 BMWE).
2. As a consequence of the aforesaid violation, Welder Helper
T. M. Kaminski shall be allowed eight (8) hours' pay at the
welder helper's straight time rate.
FINDINGS:
The Organization filed the instant claim on behalf of the Claimant when he was
issued a notice by Welder Starr that he would be suspended February 12, 1996, without
pay for refusing to read the truck manual as instructed. The Organization argues that
Rule 33(a) of the Agreement was violated by the Carrier because the Claimant was
disciplined without a fair and impartial hearing.
The Carrier argues that the Claimant worked under the supervision of Mr. Starr
and he had the right suspend the Claimant for failing to follow specific directions.
Furthermore, the Carrier contends that under the Agreement, the Claimant had a right to
request a hearing within ten days if he felt he was unjustly treated. The Claimant,
Pwc
a,
PLB 104'$
however, did not request a hearing. Therefore, the Carrier denied the claim.
The parties being unable to resolve the issue, this matter came before this Board.
This Board has reviewed the record in this case and we must find that the Claimant
was issued discipline without being afforded a fair and impartial hearing. Rule 33 (a) of
the Agreement states clearly that employees "shall not be disciplined ...until after a fair
and impartial hearing". Although foremen can issue a short suspension when the
circumstance dictate, in this case it was not the Claimant's foreman who issued the
discipline. The discipline was issued by a welder, not a foreman. The Claimant was a -
welder's helper. This Board disagrees with the Carrier's interpretation that the word
foreman is generic and would apply to a welder.
Consequently, a hearing should have been held pursuant to Rule 33 (a) because
this case did not fall within the stated exception relating to when a foreman issues the
discipline. Therefore, the claim must be sustained.
AWARD:
Claim sustained.
PET R. MEY RS
Neu al Me er
CAR9J E MEMBER OR RATION ME
Dated: 4o-%
If
Dated: ~- fit- ' _
2