PUBLIC LAW
BOARD NO. 7585
Case No.
I/Award No. 1
Carrier File No.: 10-11-0549
Organization File No.: C-11-D040-31
Claimant: D. Maahs
BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY
)
(former Burlington Northern Railroad Company)
)
)
-and- )
)
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE
)
OF WAY EMPLOYES DIVISION - IBT
)
--- - ------------------------------ -------- - ---- ------- ---------
FACTS:
Dennis A. Maahs was hired by BNSF in October of 1975 and worked continuously since
that time without disciplinary action being imposed. Prior to the incident here concerned,
he worked in the capacity of Track Inspector for about three years. He received his
2011 MOWR Requalification on March 29 of 2011.
At approximately 1304 on May 11. 2011, Maahs exceeded his track authority (milepost
229 to 197) by roughly three truck lengths. He immediately called his supervisor.
William Barbee, and reported the breach. The HLCS System subsequently triggered an
email from NOC to Barbee.
Maintenance of Way Operating Rule 14.3 requires an employee to stay within the limits
of the applicable Track Warrant. Under the Policy for Employee Performance
Accountability (PEPA), violation of an operating rule falls within the category of serious
violations. The PEPA states: "The first Serious violation will result in a 30-day record
suspension and a review period of 36 months.
Exception: Employees qualify for a
reduced review period of 12 months if they demonstrate a good work record, defined as
having at least five years of service and having been both reportable injury-free and
discipline-free during the five years preceding the date of the violation in question."
Investigation took place on June 7, 2011. On June 29. 2011, Maahs received a Level S
30 Day Record Suspension for failure to operate his inspection vehicle within his track
authority limits. He was required to complete a training and recertification test and was
placed under a three year review period.
PLB NO. 7585
AWARD I
CARRIER'S POSITION:
There is no question but that Claimant violated Rule 14.3, a serious violation. He should
be held accountable for his actions. Considering his work record, he qualified for the 36
month review period.
ORGANIZATION'S POSITION:
Claimant testified that when he breached the limits, he was on the radio trying to
coordinate a meeting for the next day. The HCLS was on the floor and he neither heard
nor saw any warning because his eyes were on the track, and with the radio going, the
HLCS cannot be heard. As soon as he realized he was past the limits he hit the brakes.
He exceeded his authority by a mere three truck lengths. The Conducting Officer
refused to admit evidence during the investigation, but relied on Claimant's personal
record without introducing it or giving Claimant an opportunity to review it. The discipline
was too harsh.
DECISION:
Clearly Claimant violated Rule 14_3. a serious violation. It was his responsibility to stay
within his track authority despite any distractions, and to be aware of the limitations of
his HLCS System. His record was, and should have been, a consideration in
determining disciplinary action, and as such, it should have been included in the
investigation. Claimant qualified for more lenient treatment under the PEPA; having
worked for the Carrier over 35 years, he had well over minimum of five years' service.
During the five years preceding the alleged violation, he had no injuries and no
discipline was imposed. As a result, he qualified for the reduced review period of 12
months.
AWARD:
The claim is sustained in part. The 30-day record suspension is affirmed but the review
period shall be reduced to 12 months.
ORDER:
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an
award favorable to the Claimant be made. The Carrier is to comply with the award on or
before 30 days following the date the award is adopted.
March 19, 2013; Cleveland, Ohio
Patricia T. Bittel, Neutral Member
_a
A
Gary Hart, Labor Member
J
D. J Merrell. Carrier Member
2