Parties:

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers

And

Union Pacific Railroad Co.


Statement of claim:

 Claim of Engineer R.R. Seitsin2er her°_inafter claimant) for compensation for all time lost, including time attending investigation in connection with claimant's assessment of Level 2 Upgrade. Further, claimants personal record to be expunged of any notation relative to this case.

 Background:
Claimant commenced service with the carrier in 19 73 and was promoted to engineer in 1981'. On the date in question (June :. 1999) claimant was assigned to run No. ivfKCWCOZ. Claimant was aboard his locomotive in the refuelin_ area identified as 196, awaiting service to his engine. At approximate!-, 8:15 A.M. Mr. Rivera, 'Manager Terminal Operations, arrived at the refueling area. He states he observed claimant on the locomotive, and that claimant did not nave hearing protection in his right ear. At that time fir. Rivera requested another officer accompany him to verify claimant did not have hearing protection in his right ear. Mr. Rivera in cotrpany with tlvIr. Guzman, S.M.O.P. boarded claimants locomotive and again stated claimant had no earplug in his right ear. Claimant was subsequently charged with violation of Rule 71.2.'.

 Carriers Position
Safety of employees is of primar; concern. .A11 persons in close proximity to locomotives
 must wear hearing protection. When -;board engines hearing protection must be wom if
 doors and windows are open. When obse; .-ed by carrier officers, claimant was not
 wearing said protection.

 Organizations Position

 Claimant's representati·. a .vas denied tl-,e -igitt to properly represent claimant, due to the absence of certain -.vitnesses. The entire hearing -,Nag conducted over the objections of the oroani-admt. Y4 hile ;t is cormect ;hat at :ones claimant ;tad hearing protection in only one
 ~a uo. c~ s ~~
 ,qLV P Ub . (,J

 ear; this was precipitated by the need to converse with his conductor and round house personnel.

 Findings:
The basic rules of fairness were ignored in the instant case. The hearing was conducted over the objections of claimant's representative. Claimant's representative requested various witnesses and records, however, his requests were ignored. This Board can overlook portions of said requests with the exception of one, that is, claimants Conductor . Martinez, who was aboard claimants engine during questioning. The conducting officer Mr. M. Chavez did an admirable job of trampling claimant's rights to a full, fair and impartial hearing. Boards have held over the years that flawed hearings excuse the necessity of delving into the merits of a particular case. In support, among many others, we Bite Awards 19373, 20094.

 Award:

 Claim sustained.
              Leonard Foster, Neutral Member of the Board


-s? 7 -~'~

Date