PARTIES: Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes TO DISPUT=: Chicano and North Western Transportation Company





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 that the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute herein.

 Claimant was regularly assigned as a section crew foreman at Carrier's Illinois Division Madison Yard, hours 7:30 A.M. to 4:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. On April 25, 1983, claimant was moving a production tamper throuxh Edwprdsville, Illinoisr, at what a Roadmaster considered an unsafe speed while aoaroachina apublic road crossing in th= center of town. On April 27, 1983, claimant was instructed to a= tend. formal hearing scheduled for 9:00 FS:, May 3, 1983, in the office of Roadmaster at Benld, Illinois, on the charge:

By agreement, the hearing was rescheduled for 11:00 AM the ssme dare in the office of Roa6master at South Pekin. A copy of the transcript of the hearing has been made a part of the record. We find that the hearing was conducted in a fair and Impartial manner. Following the hearing, claimant was a~sessed discipline of thirty days deferred suspension.

 Carrier's Rules 1043 and 1044 of Rules of the Engineering Department, were read into the hearing, and provide:
                                                Docket No. 30 Page 2.


              "1043: Work eaukpment must give right-of-way to all highway traffic. When annroaching a highway where view is obstructed, the work eouipment must be stoDDed and the operator must have absolute knowledge that crossing is clear before nroceedinR. When necessary, a memb°r of the crew must flag the eroising."


              'l1044: Work eauipment must be operated at all times at a safe sveed as the way is seen or known to be clear giving consideration to curvature, grade, visibility, condition of rail, loading and weather conditions. Unless otherwise authorized, work equipment must not exce=d 30 MPH, except must not exceed:


                20 MPH when coupled with other work equipment or hy-rail vehicles.

            10 MPH when passing stations, through yards,

            over switches, frogs, railroad, highway

            or farm crossings and through interlockings.

                10 MPH in back-up movement. Track cars must not be operated in reverse beyond first point where they can be turned."


In the investigation, or hearing, the Rondmaster testified that he observed the tamer being operated by claimant anDroach the crossing involved at about 20 miles per hour, and that the tamper did not slow down for the crossing. Claimant estimated his sped over the crossing at 10 miles per hour, and when questioned as to whether he reduced his sD°ed when he reached the crossing, his answers were somewhat evasive.

 There is considerable difference between a speed of 10 miles Der hour and 20 miles Der hour for a tamn_er in a situation of the kind here involved. Rule 1044 does not establish 10 miles per hour as the safest speed in all cases. There was considerable conflict between the testimony of the Roadmaster and th-t of the claimant. We adhere to the Drincirle that a Bosrd of this nature does not weigh evidence, attempt to resolve conflicts therein, or , pass upon the credibility of witnesses. Such functions are reserved to the Carrier. The Board may not properly reverse the Carrier's decision simply because o° conflicts in testimony. Further, in a. case of this kind the Carrier has a right to rely uaon the testimony of its supervisor.

                        A W A H D


        Claim denied.


Chairman, Neutral Member
 d ~ 9
 ~? ~1'~'~- ~ ~~1 W'f,CT~YW
 harrier Member Labor Membe
 Dated: A, ./7 ~ /5~