PLBNO. 7566
AWARD NO. 214
in the notice of investigation. Because the notice was faulty, the Organization was not properly placed on notice as required by Rule 31.
The Board sits as an appellate forum in discipline cases. As such, it does not weigh the evidence de novo. Thus, it is not our function to substitute our judgment for the Carrier's judgment and decide the matter according to what we might have done had the decision been ours. Rather, our inquiry is whether substantial evidence exists to sustain the finding against Claimant. If the question is decided in the affirmative, we are not warranted in disturbing the penalty absent a showing that the Carrier's actions were an abuse of discretion.
Claimant struck the side of the garage entrance while backing an end loader with malfunctioning brakes and frozen hydraulics. Claimant admitted to the collision in his statement. He was trying to move the end loader into the garage to thaw it. Obviously, moving equipment with malfunctioning brakes and frozen hydraulics is a risky venture and that risk clearly failed. The Organization was on notice that of the alleged misconduct. There is no question that Claimant struck the building with the end loader.
Claim denied.
Adam Gilmour Organization Member
2
, c
Steven Napierkowski Carrier Member
...------- -- -
/ <-=--
Brian Clauss Neutral Member
Dated: December 18, 2024
3