AWARD NO. 337
Organization File No.
I 16
PUBLIC LAW BOARD 
PARTIES TO DISPUTE
) BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES DIVISION.
) INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
)
)
) CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
The s discipline [fi1ly (50) actual suspension] of Mr. D. Hopson, by letter dated July 18, 201 in connection \Vith allegations that he occupied the working limits of an employe in charge without permission was arbitrary, unsupported, unwarranted and in violation of the Agreement (Carrier's File 201 J 16 CSX).
a consequence of the violation referred to in Pmi l above, Claimant Hopson shall now be made whole for all lost wages (straight time, overtime and holiday 
time the timt' he has
his retirement, be reimbursed for the expenses due to his investigation (lodging receipt attached), have all charges expunged from his record, and have the Carrier to provide a written apology to Mr. Hopson and his family for causing them to go through a hardship.' (Employes' Exhibit·A-2')."
The Board, upon consideration of the entire record and all of the evidence, finds that the parties are Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, that this Board is duly constituted by Agreement dated March 20, 2008, this Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein, and that the parties were given due notice of the hearing held.
This case arises from the same facts and circumstances that were involved in Award No.
of this Board. In that case, we found that the Carrier had substantial evidence to support its charge
PUBI..IC LAW BOARD No. 7163
337
PAGE
that the Claimant therein. Assistant Foreman Bryant, had occupied the 707 working limits of another 
had 
without permission. This arose when Assistant Foreman Bryant had placed his rail vehicle on the tracks at a crossing that was v\tithin his track authority, but overlapped with of the other employee. In our Award, we modified the discipline imposed by the Carrier by reinstating Assistant Foreman Bryant without pay for time lost. We expressly stated that our decision was based solely upon his length of service and the fact that his record contained no prior disciplinary actions. For his responsibility in this case, the Carrier issued the Claimant herein a suspension for time served from May 24 to July 18, 2017.
In the case now before us. Claimant was a Bridge Mechanic working with Assistant Foreman Bryant and was in the vehicle that was placed on the track within the other employee's track authority. It is the Organization's position that Claimant had no responsibility for this violation because he had no knowledge that they were within the 707 working limits of the other employee or that the boards had been moved by his Assistant Foreman.
The Carrier imposed this discipline on the basis that Claimant either knew, or should have known, that the rules were being violated. It insists that Claimant had a responsibility to know that rules were being complied with and they were not occupying track without authority. The Carrier notes that all of the other team members who were in the truck at the time waived investigations and admitted to their violations. Although it contends it could have dismissed Claimant for this Major Offense, the Carrier explains it exercised leniency in his case because of his thirty-eight years of service.
PUBl.!C LAW BOARD NO. 7163
We concur with the position that Claimant had a responsibility to comply with the
did not encroach on another s track authority.
not, ofthe location the stop board at the crossing and that Assistant Foreman Bryant it prior to placing the vehicle on the track. We find. therefore, that the Carrier
was
substantial
evidence to support its charge against him. We have no basis for modifying the discipline imposed.
AWARD: Claim denied.
E. s'imon
and Niutral Member
Andrew Mulford Employee Member
Dated: -0-2/0-4/-19 ----
Arlington Heights, lllinois
Katrina Donovan Carrier Member