AWARD NO. 210
CASE NO. 297
SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 280
PARTIES ) BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES
TO )
DISPUTE ) ST. LOUIS SOUTHWESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement
when Track Laborer R. D. Hess was unjustly
dismissed from service in letter dated January
21, 1985. (Later reduced to a fifty (50) day
suspension.)
2. Claimant Hess shall now be reimbursed for
any expenses he has suffered and paid for all
time lost, including all expenses incurred for
having to attend the investigation which encompassed eight (8) hours pay, $15.00 meal allowance and mileage pay for five hundred (500)
miles round trip from Bell City, Missouri to
Pine Bluff, Arkansas and return, and his personal record cleared of all charges." (MW-8511-CB-Hess; 53-801)
FINDINGS:
The Board, after hearing upon the whole record and all the
evidence, finds that the parties herein are Carrier and Employee
within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended; this
Board has jurisdiction over,the dispute involved herein: and, the
parties were given due notice of hearing thereon.
The record shows that although Claimant allegedly sustained a
personal on the job injury on September 4, 1984 that he did not
submit a personal injury report relative to such matter to the
Carrier until October 29, 1984.
That Claimant would maintain he was not aware of the injury until
October 12, 1984, or when he was advised to have corrective neck
surgery, which thereafter took place on October 16, 1984, may not
be said to have represented valid reason for Claimant not having
promptly reported the alleged injury to the Carrier.
Even assuming arguendo, as the Organization urges, that Claimant
did not realize the severity of his injury until such time as he
began to suffer severe pain at a later date, the fact remains
Claimant had discussed with Carrier's supervisors the need to be
released from duty for the doctor's appointment on October 11,
1984, but had not at that time, according to Carrier witnesses,
mentioned the injury as having been job related. Furthermore,
the Claimant stated at the company hearing that he had seen a
doctor on September 20, 1'984 and had also cancelled other ap-
t
S(3A a
eD AWARD NO. 210
CASE NO. 297
pointments with the doctor notwithstanding his neck and shoulder
were reportedly bothering him to a great extent in pain.
It being clearly evident that claimant had not reported the alleged personal injury to carrier in a timely manner in accordance
with Rule M of Carrier's Rules and Regulations for the Maintenance of Way Department, the Board has no reason to hold that
Carrier did not have the right to take appropriate disciplinary
action.
AWARD:
Claim denied.
Robert E. Peterson, Chairman
and Neutral Member
v
R. aylor M. A. Christie
Car4 Member Organization Member
Houston, TX
August 29, 1986
2