BEFORE SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 924
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES
and
CHICAGO & NORTH WESTERN TRANSPORTATION CO.
AWARD No. 198
Case No. 220
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the Brotherhood that:
1. The disqualification of R. T. Husby as a track supervisor, foreman
and assistant foreman was without just and sufficient cause and
excessive (Organization File 7RP-5085D; Carrier File 81-91-190).
2. The Carrier violated the Agreement when it did not timely notify the
General Chairman of the discipline and provide a copy of the investigation transcript as required by Rule 19(b).
3. As a result of Parts (1) and/or (2) above, R. T. Husby shall now have
his seniority rights as a track supervisor, foreman and assistant fore
man restored and he must be compensated for all wage loss suffered.
FINDINGS:
Claimant R. T. Husby, a foreman, was working on the Eau Claire Subdivision on
July 10, 1991. The area where the Claimant and his surfacing gang were working was
protected and, therefore, it was the Claimant's responsibility to place red flags or boards
at the appropriate mile posts warning approaching trains.
At approximately 11:35 a. m. on the date in question, Train EMPRA, while
approaching the Eau Claire Subdivision, was put into emergency by its engineer allegedly
because a red board was placed at Mile Post 84.2 instead of 84.7. Subsequently, the
Claimant was notified to attend an investigation to determine his responsibility in
SBA 924 - AWARD 198 - PAGE 2
allegedly misplacing the red boards while working on the Eau Claire Subdivision.
At the hearing, it was determined that the red board should have been placed at
MP 84.7 instead of at MP 84.2. Hence, it was placed one-half mile short of where it ws
supposed to have been placed. As a result of the evidence presented at the hearing; the
Claimant was found guilty as charged and disqualified as track supervisor, foreman, and
assistant foreman.
The parties being unable to resolve the issue, this matter now comes 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 fmding that the Claimant was
guilty of placing the red board at the wrong location. Claimant admitted that he put the
red board at the Mile Post 84.2 and he is now aware of the consequences of his wrongful
action. As a result of the Claimant's action, the train had to go into an emergency, and as
a result, a knuckle was broken on one car and the train was delayed.
Once this Board has determined that there is sufficient evidence in the record to
support the guilty finding, we next 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 been disqualified as track foreman
and track supervisor. The Claimant's record also reveals three letters of reprimand and 5day and 30-day suspensions. Given the nature of the wrongdoing in this case, and the
2
SBA 924 - AWARD 198 - PAGE 3
previous disciplinary record of the Claimant, this Board cannot fmd that the action taken
by the Carrier was unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Therefore, the claim will be
denied.
AWARD
Claim denied.
~'ETER en YERS
Neutral er
C er Member Or ation Member
DATED: DATED: ".
3