BEFORE PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 7590 CASE N0. 33

BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES DIVISION

V.

BNSF RAILWAY

(Former ATSF Railway)

Carrier File No. 14-12-0529

Organization File. 1732-13C2-1267

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

1. The Carrier violated the Agreement commencing September 19, 2012, when Claimant, Mark Karagias (0127795), was disciplined with a Level S Combined 30- day Record Suspension which included 28-day Actual Suspension and a 2-day Record Suspension with a 3 year review period for his alleged failure to safely operate grapple truck which resulted in electrical pole being broken into two pieces and power lines being ripped down on September 19, 2012. The Carrier alleged

violation of MOWOR Ll Safety, MOWOR 1.1.l Maintaining a Safe Course,

MOWOR 1.1.2 Alert and Attentive, MOWOR 1.6 Conduct and MOWSR 12.8.1

Backing Vehicle.

2. As aconsequence of the violation referred to in part 1the Carrier shall remove from the Claimant's record this discipline and he be reinstated with seniority, vacation, all rights unimpaired and pay for all wage loss commencing September 19, 2012. and continuing forward and/or otherwise made whole.

The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved in this dispute are respectively carrier or employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

Public Law Board 7590 has jurisdiction over the parties and the dispute involved herein.

The Organization asserts a number of procedural errors in the instant claim including removing Claimant from service pending investigation. On the merits, the Organization asserts that Claimant inspected the right of way before operating his grapple truck. However, the two feet of vegetation obscured the ground wire for the electrical pole. Further, the discipline w excessive.

PLB No. 7590 Award No. 33

The Carrier asserts that there is substantial evidence of the cited infractions. Claimant did not operate the grapple 1rUck in accordance with the Rules and pulled down apole and power line when his outrigger caught a ground wire.

The Board sits as an appellate forum in discipline cases. As such, it does not weigh the evidence de novo.Th it isnot our function to substitute ourjudgment for the Canier'sjudgment and decide the matter according to what we might have done bad 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'sactions were an abuse of discretion.

A review of the instant evidence shows that there were no procedural defects that void the discipline. Claimant was placed on notice of the incident under investigation and the cited Rules at issue. Onthe m the evidence established that Claimant was operating his truck inthe area of an electricalpole. Hecaught a ground wire and snapped apole and pulled down the line. These facts establish the evidence for the cited Rule violations. Further, an examination of the record indicates no abuse of discretion is assessing the instant discipline.

Clajm denied.

<[b R. .hJJ

Dave Scoville

Organization Member

'.8r£a&Clauw

Brian Clauss Neutral Member

"Z Z ,2015

f

Samantha Rogen - J

Carrier Member

2