PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 6284
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers
AWARD NO. 1
-and- CASE N0.1
Burlington Northern-Santa Fe Railway
STATEMENT OP CLAIM:
That Engineer John Partridge's discipline be
reversed, that he be made whole for any and all
time lost, and that the notation on his personal
record as a result of this incident be removed.
FINDINGS:
This Public Law Board No. 6284 finds that the parties herein are Carrier
and Employee, within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, and that
this Board has jurisdiction.
By letter dated September 5, 1997, the Claimant, Engineer J. W. Partridge,
was notified that he was assessed a thirty day suspension for violation of the
Carrier's rules on August 8, 1997 as follows:
This letter will confirm that as a result of
formal investigation on August 28, 1997, concerning your exceeding the authorized speed past
restrictive block indication when entering the
west siding switch at Stanley, North Dakota at
approximately 0427 hours CDT, August 8, 1997
while Locomotive Engineer on train S-SEACHC1-06
on duty Glasgow, Montana at 2200 hours August 7,
1997, you are issued a Level S suspicions of (30)
thirty days for violation of Rules 6.27, 9.1.7
and 9.1.13 of the General Code of Operating Rules.
Additionally you have been assigned a probationary period of (1) one year. If you commit
another serious rule violation during the
tenure of this probation period, you will be
subject to dismissal.
Your suspension will commence on August 9, 1997.
Any scheduled vacation, leave of absence, or
furlough during this time will extend your suspension by the corresponding number of days
that fall within the suspension period. You
will be reinstated at 0001 hours, Monday,
September 8, 1997. Trainmaster Roger Brawn at
-2_p
o.)~.
Glasgow, Montana will have your Locomotive
Engineer's Certificate to return to you on
September 8, 1997.
This letter will be placed in your personal file.
Your signing below serves as receipt of this
Level S suspension.
Respectfully,
s/David J. Boen
Terminal Manager
The Organization appealed the discipline, and the matter has been properly
progressed to this Board of adjudication. '
In the early morning period of August 8, 1997, Engineer Partridge was
proceeding eastward from Ross, N.D. approaching Stanley on train S-SEACHC1-06.
After passing the east bound signal at Ross (M.P. 60.2), the train passed two
more signals prior to encountering the signal at West Stanley. Those signals
were located at M.P. 58.6 and M.P. 57.0. The train proceeded eastward from
Ross around a long right hand curve after which; both-signals 58.6 and 57.0
become visible. Both the Claimant and Conductor Hicks testified that each of
those signals displayed clear indications as they approached and passed them.
In fact, the Claimant and Signal Supervisor Jacobson agreed that the signal at
57.0 West Stanley is very visible, especially at night. The pulse tapes
indicate that Engineer Partridge was alert and performing his duties
consistent
with the territory at that time. If the signal at West Stanley displayed a
restrictive indication as asserted by the Carrier, the signal at M.P. 58.6 had
to display "approach medium`, flashing yellow. If the signal at West Stanley
displayed a restrictive indication as asserted by the Carrier, the signal at
M.P. 57.0 had to display "approach", yellow.
Strictly limited to the narrow facts of this particular record, including
the answers to Questions 1005 and 1006, we must conclude that the Carrier has
not met its burden of proof. We shall sustain this claim.
PLC No, to28y
AWARD
Claim sustained.
ORDER: The Carrier is required to comply with this
award within thirty days.
Chairman and Neut 1 Member
C.
Employee Member
Dated:,
r
P~, o ,uo.
I
Carrier Member,/