_ )
) Case No. 8
?sward No. 5
Martin Fl. Malin, Chairman & Neutral Member
F. K. Geller, Employee :Member
M~ J. Kovacs, Carrier Member
Hearing Date: December 11, 2003
1. The discipline (twenty demerits) imposed on First Class Carpenter R. E. Crandall
tar his alleged failure to comply with Operating Rule C Wad Safety Rille 1.4 in
connection with an injury sustained on January 13, 2003, was without just and
sufficient cause and based on an unproven charge (Carrier's File &365-799)
2. First Class Carpenter R. L:. Crandall shall now have the twenty demerits and all
reference to this incident retrieved from his personal retard.
Public Law Board No. 6466. upon the whale retard and ail the evidence, finds and holds
that Employee and Carrier are employee and carrier within the meaning of the Railway Labor
pct, as amended; and, that the Board has jurisdiction aver the dispute herein; and, that the parties
to the dispute were given due notice of the hearing thereon and did participate therein.
On January 31, 20()3, Carrier notified Claimant to appear for an investigation on February
11, 2003, concerning his alleged failure to comply with Operating Rule C and Safety Rule lf, in
connection with an injury he sustained on January 13, 2003. The hewing was held as scheduled.
On March 3, 2003, Carrier notified Claimant that he had been found guilty of the charge and had
been assessed twenty demerits.
The retard reflects that an January 13. 2003, Claimant was on a ladder, painting the
ceiling in a restroorn at the David Road Tower Office, when he fell off the second rung and
injured his shoulder. The accident occurred at approximately 2:15 p.rn. The Structure
Supervisor interviewed Claimant in the hospital at approximately 5:30 p.m. Claimant told the
Structure Supervisor that, he was on the ladder, dipped his paint brush in a paint bucket and when
he went to wave the brash back up to paint, his heel hit the urinal partition causing bin a to lass
his balance and fall to the floor. Claimant's description of the accident thus indicated that
Claimant was not maintaining three point contact with the ladder, as required by Rule Irk. The
Supervisor opined that Claimant could not have fallen if he had been using three point contact,
The Supervisor further opined that Claimant did not take care to prevent injury to himself, as
required by Rate C.
The Organization objected to the interview because Claimant had taken pain medication.
However, there is no evidence ire the record that Claimant's cognitive functioning was impaired
by the medication and Claimant testified at the hearing that he, remembered what he; told the
Supervisor during the interview. Having reviewed the record as a whole, we find that Carrier
proved the violations by substantial evidence.
AWARD
Claire denied.
hale
J. i0fovacs
Carrier Member
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, March 13, 2004
Martin H. Malin, Chairman
I=. K. tie.ller
Employee Member