Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division - IBT Rail Conference
-and..
AWardNo. 64
Case No, 64
Canfor's File 8-01064 DHR
Delaware and Hudson Railroad Company d/b/a Canadian Pacific Railway
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
The discipline [twenty (20) day actual suspension plus a.one (1)year suspension as an Employee in Charge] assessed to Mr. N. Maxwell by letter dated July I, 2015 for alleged violation.of On Track Safety Rules Section 29.3 B Responsibilities of Employee in Charge, Section 30.1 Conducting a Joh briefing, 21.0 on Track Safety Procedures and Section 21.1 Occupying a Fouling Controlled Tracks on June 8. 2015 was arbitrary, without just cause and constituted a violation·of the Agreement
As a consequence of the violation referred to in Part l above, the Carder shall reverse the discipline decisionand make Claimant N, Maxwell whole for all losses suffered, including all straight time and overtime hours lostor denied as a result ofthe discipline.
This Public Law Board 7357 finds that the parties are Carrier and Employee, within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, and that this Board has jurisdiction.
By letter dated July l, 2015, the Claimant, Mr. N. Maxwell, was notified by the Can"ier
that he was assessed the discipline of a 20-day suspension and a 1-year suspension as an Employee in Charge as follows:
Dear Mr. Maxwell:
Asa result of the facts developed at the formal investigation hearing, held on Monday, June 15111, 2015 at Oneonta, NY. You have been found to be in Violation of On Track
PLB No. 7357
Award No. 64
Safety Rules Section29.J B. Resportsibilities of Employee in Charge, Section 30.l Conducting a Job Briefing, 21.00n Track Safety Procedures, and Section 21.1 Occupying or Fouling Controlled Tracks.
You are:
Suspended for 20 Days. Time served Pending investigation will be used your suspension will be Effective beginning 6/9/2015 to 7/5/2015 you may return to service on 7/6/2015 you will also be assessed a I year suspension asan Employee in Charge beginning June 9111, 2015 until June 911t, 2016.
s/Joffre Roy - Director Track Renewal. Canada East
The Organization appealed this discipline and the matter has been progressed to this Board for adjudication.
No basis exist to set aside the discipline in this case on ptocedutal grounds. Substantial evidence of record, including the testimony of the Roadmaster Zachary
McHale and Claimant Nicholas Maxwell himself supports the Canier determination that Mr. Maxwell was in violation of On Track Safety Rules Section29.3 B. Responsibilities of
Etnployee in Charge, Section 30. l Conducting a Job Bl'iefing,21.0 OnTrack SafetyPtocedures,
and Section2Ll Occupying or Fouling Controlled Tracks on June 8, 2015, As a result of the rules violations eight machines and operators occupied the main track nm1h of CPC 35 without authority. Mr. McHale, after hearing the radio conversation between lead machine operator Valentine and Mr. Maxwell, then observed the equipment north ofCPC 35, and had the operators back up south ofCPC35 to tenitory where the crew had track and time authority. Mr. Maxwell testified in part:
Q. Soin the end whose whose responsibility was the protection of the teams?
A. Thatwould be me. Ultimately it comes down to me.
Q. And were they on track unprotected?
A. Yes.
PLB No. 7357
Award No. 64
Q. Okay.
A. But they knew- ultimately, it's my fault and I know and lknow that, but with a switch yes it doesn>t mean you can continue on north if they knew where they were in the east nmnei:. I stm know it's my you know whaU'm saying?
Q. Did you- did you have a job briefing with the team you got to CPC 35, like
any type of followup Job briefing or anything like that?
m
The discipline assessed in this case was neither arbitrary, capricious nor excessive. We must deny this claim.
Award
Claim denied.
-------
