Parties Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
 to and
 Dispute Union Pacific Railroad Company
 (Former Missouri Pacific Railroad

 Statement
 of Claim: (1) Carrier violated the Agreement, especially Rule 12,
 when Z. Hackett was assessed 30 days actual
 suspension.

        (2) Claim in behalf of Mr. Hackett for wage loss suffered beginning October 21, 1991 and removal of said discipline from his record.


Findings: The Board has jurisdiction of this dispute by reason
 of the Parties Agreement establishing this Board therefor.
 This is a companion case to that in our Award No. 578
 the findings of which by reference are incorporated herein.
 Therein that Foreman caused the Machine Operator of AD-10 to
 come out and occupy the main line without protection of
 authority.
 This case involves an Assistant Foreman who failed to
 get the required protection for AD-10 which was under his
 jurisdiction. Supervisor Bulen (P-10) is most telling. He
 briefed both Foremen on the protection needed as well as the
 work to be done. Assistant Foreman Hackett should have
 obtained the necessary protection for Machine Operator
 Marquez and he did not. Hackett assumed that Marquez was
 still "in the hole" at Cranell and Foreman Joubert who gave
 permission for Mr. Marquez to come out on the main line
 assumed Mr. Marquez was protected under Mr. Hackett's order.
 It was fortunate that those erroneous assumptions on the
 parts of Foreman Joubert and Acting Foreman Hackett did not
 result in serious injury or loss of life to Operator
 Marquez.
 The discipline is reasonable. This claim will be
 denied.
 Awar Clpm denied.

 14x- A04*~

                j% \,, 5LY&

      ammons, r., Employee Member TCa y exande , Carrier Member


                  Arthur .~Eil'V~an Wart, ~~

hai rman and Neutral Member Issued May 22, 1993.