PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 6302
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES )
Case No. 136
and )
Award No. 135
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY )
Martin H. Malin, Chairman & Neutral Member
T. W. Kreke, Employee Member
D. A. Ring, Carrier Member
Hearing Date: February 7, 2008
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
(I) The discipline assessment (a 5-day suspension) issued to Mr. Kevin A. Crosser for
allegedly failing to maintain equipment as well as allegedly failing to follow
foreman and work equipment mechanics instructions regarding equipment
maintenance was based on unproven charges and in violation of the Agreement.
(2) As a consequence of the violation referred to in Part (I) above, the Claimant is to
be made whole as if there had been no discipline and no suspension. Also,
Claimant is to be paid for all hours that he would have worked absent the
suspension on July 24" through 28, 2006, including any overtime and he shall be
compensated for his time not paid on the day of the hearing, July 14, 2006. His
record is to cleared of all charges.
FINDINGS:
Public Law Board No. 6302 upon the whole record and all of the evidence, finds and
holds that Employee and Carrier are employee and carrier within the meaning of the Railway
Labor Act, as amended; and, that the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute herein; and, that the
parties to the dispute were given due notice of the hearing thereon and did participate therein.
On May 23, 2006, Carrier notified Claimant of an offer of discipline. The notice charged
that Claimant, while working as a Ballast Regulator Operator on May 12, 2006, failed to properly
maintain the equipment and failed to follow foreman and work equipment mechanic's
instructions. The notice offered discipline at UPGRADE Level 3, and advised Claimant of his
PLB NO. 63172
AWARD 135
right to a formal hearing or of the option to elect participation in the Behavior Modification
Program. On June 9, 2006, Claimant elected to exercise his right to a formal hearing. On June
12, 2006, Claimant was directed to report for an investigation on June 23, 2006, concerning the
charges previously set forth and reiterated in the June 12 notice. The hearing was postponed to
and held on July 14, 2006. On July 21, 2006, Claimant was advised that he had been found
guilty of the charges and assessed discipline at UPGRADE Level 3, a five day suspension.
The Organization contends that Carrier failed to provide Claimant with a statement of the
precise charges against him. We do not agree. Carrier is contractually obligated to provide
Claimant with a statement of charges sufficiently precise to enable him to prepare his defense.
We believe that the notice of charges provided to Claimant met this standard.
We have reviewed the lengthy record in this case and find that Carrier proved the charges
by sub substantial evidence. Several witnesses testified to the condition of the ballast regulator
as found in an inspection on May 12, 2006. Particularly telling is testimony from several
witnesses that the fluid levels in the boom drive, the gear drive and the transmission were low,
yet Claimant admitted he had never had the plugs out.
AWARD
Claim denied.
D.
A. Ring
Carrier Member
Date. at Chicago, Illinois, June 25, 2008
Z A/0 ~ /PV/- 41 / / ("
Martin H. Malin, Chairman
T. W. Kreke, mployee Member
Employee ember
CA4
2f ~2 6w