BEFORE SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 924
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES
and
CHICAGO & NORTH WESTERN TRANSPORTATION CO.
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the Brotherhood that:
1. The five (5) day suspension assessed Track Supervisor L. L. Soren
for alleged failure to properly follow track maintenance procedures
on June 27, 1990 was without just and sufficient cause and capricious
(Organization File 2PG-3349D; Carrier File 81-90-104).
2. Track Supervisor L. L. Soren shall now be allowed the remedy
prescribed in Rule 19(d).
FINDINGS:
The Claimant, L. L. Soren, was employed by the Carrier as a track supervisor for
the Jewell Subdivision.
On June 27, 1990, the Claimant's crew installed eight crossties at Mile Post 53.7
before noon. In the afternoon, two Carrier supervisors inspected the area where the
crossties were installed and determined that the installation was not done according to
Rule 1005 which explains the proper procedure to be taken when installing crossties in
hot weather.
Subsequently, the Claimant was notified to appear for a formal investigation to
determine his responsibility for not following Carrier procedures when his crew installed
5'6
A
61
Z4' - Awd 1 g ti
crossfes in 90-degree weather. He was found guilty as charged and assessed a five-day
suspension. The Organization filed a claim on behalf of the Claimant but it was denied.
The parties not being able to resolve the issues, this matter came before this Board.
This Board has reviewed the evidence and testimony in this case and we find that
there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the finding that the Claimant was
guilty of violating Carrier Rules when he improperly installed crossties on June 27, 1991.
Although the Organization argues that the Claimant completed installing the ties before
the temperature reached 90 degrees, the Claimant admitted in his testimony that on that
date it was going to be in the "mid-90's". He also admitted that he was aware of the
Track Maintenance Handbook and the procedures contained therein. He further admitted
that he did not tell the other track employees to adjust the ties after he observed that the
ties were installed in violation of the Rules.
Once this Board has determined that there is sufficient evidence in the record to
support the guilty finding, we next must turn our attention to the type of discipline
imposed. This Board will not set aside a Carrier's imposition of discipline unless we find
its actions to have been unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious.
In the case at hand, the Claimant had previously received a ten-day deferred
suspension, a letter of reprimand, a written warning, and he had been disqualified as a
track foreman. Given that previous disciplinary background, this Board cannot find that
the disciplinary action taken by the Carrier in this case was unreasonable, arbitrary, or
capricious. Therefore, the claim will be denied.
2
S(JA
q ~y _ awa 8l.
AWARD
Claim denied.
PkT ER R-
U
C ' Member
W
Or 'zation Member
D ED:
Q4&
DATED:
3