SPECIAL BOARD OF AI:JUST :ENT NO. 9226

Award No. 19 Docket No. 23 PARTIES: Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes. TO : DISPUTE: Chicago-and North Western Transportation Company

STATFPIENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

(1) The twenty (20) day suspension and disqualification of Foreman J. S. Summerhill for allegedly failing to properly perform his ditties and falsification of work reports was without just end sufficient cause, on the basis of unproven charges, and unwarranted. (Organization File 3D-35060 Carrier-File 8T-83··40-D) .

(2) Foreman J. S. Summerhill shall be allowed the remedy prescribed In Rule 19(d).

FINDINGS:

This Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds that the employes and the Carrier involved, are respectively employes and Carrier within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, and thst the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute herein.

Claimant, with about twelve years of service, was observed by two Carrier officers engaging in a conversation with a signal maintainer for about thirty minutes between 11:09 A.M. end l1:Y' A.M., on October 29, 1982. Claimant was subseeuently notifipd to attend an investigation on November 5, 1982. on the charge:

"Your responsibility for failure to properly perform your duties and falsification of work reports between 11=10 A.M. and 12 Noon on October 29, 1982."

The investigation was conducted as scheduled and a copy of the transcript has been made a part of the record. Following the investigation, clbimant was assessed discipline of twenty days suspension and discuslified as a foreman. We have carefully reviewed the tranqcripofthb investigation and find that it was conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Discipline was warranted. However, permanent 0isquali:ication as a foremen was excessive. We will sward that claimant's rights as a foreman be restored within thirty dpys from the date of this award, but will':?-ny any claim for compensation for time lost.

The Organization has raised procedural contentions thpt the officer who conduct-d the investigation did not render the

'3e',q 'FD-

y

Award No. 19

Docket No, 23

Facre 2

disciplinary decision, snd that the deciding officer also served as first anneals officer. This Board has heretofore passed upon similar procedural contentions in our Awards Nos. 9, 14, and 15. We consider t-cse iecisions controlling and will deny the Orsra_^.ir9tIon's Procedural contentions herein.

A ;7 a H D

C1.aim sustained to the extent indicated in Findlncs.

ORDER.

The Carrier is directed to comply with this Award within thirty days from the ente hereof.

Chatrr..P;n, Neutrnl i:emb=r

Car · t 'r Member - Labor iMembnr

Dated: 8'Aqw