PABTIESi Bt-otherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
 TO
 DISPUTE- Chicago and North Western Transportation Company
 STATEMENT OF CLAIM:"Claim of the System Committee of the Brother®
 hood that:
 (1) The sixty (6o) day suspension and disqualification of
 Foreman D. G-. Weik for allemed 'responsibility for your
 · failure to wear prescribed safety equipment and your
 failure to properly perform-.your duties as a foreman when
 employes under your supervision failedto wear prescribed
 safety equipment on August 30, 1983' was without just and
 sufficient cause, capricious, discriminatory and in vio
 lation of the Agreement. (Organization File 3D-4035;
 Carrier File 91-84-46-D).
 (2) Claimant D. G:. Weik shall be allowed the-remedy pre-
        scribed in Rule 19(d).",


FINDINGS: ..

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

          The record shows that claimant was employed as Foreman

-of the Girard, Illinois Section Crew on the Carrier; s Illinois Division. On August 31, 1983, he was instructed to report for a formal hearing, scheduled for 9:00 A.M., September--9, 19$3. on the charge:

      "To determine your responsibility for your failure to wear.prescribed safety enuipment and your failure to properly perform your duties as a foreman when employees under your supervision failed to wear prescribed safety equipment on August 30, 1983.°


The hearing, or investigation, was, by agreement, postponed and rescheduled for 9:00 A.M., September 15,,1983. A copy of thp transcript of the hearing has been made a part of the record. From our review we find that none of claimant's substantive Drocedural rights was violated, and that the hearing was conducted in a fair and impartial manner.

          Rule 33(A) of Carrier's timetable in- effect at the time

' S~,e- day

                                                - Award-'No. 42 Docket No. 46 Page 2:


of the occurrence herein, as read into the hearing or investigation, provides in part:

        "Personnel in 'hard hat' areas, or performing -Shard hat' work, or assigned to 'hard hats jobs, must wear hard hats while on duty."


In the hearing, or investigation,- there, was substantial evidence by the Roadmaster, the Assistant &oadmaster; and claimant's own statement, that during the afternoon of August 30, 1983, claimant and a member of his crew were performing 'hard hat' work in "hard hat" areas without hard hats. The charge affainst the claimant was sustained. On September 23, 1983. claimant was noti-
 fied of discipline to be imposed: - -

 .. "Sixty--(60) days actual suspension-and disqualification
 as a track foreman. Suspension to begin on September 26,
 1983." -

    - We find that severe discipline was warranted.No em-

ploye may decide for himself the rules that he will comply with
 or when he will be in compliance. The sixty days actual
 Suspension was warranted, but,disqualification as a track fore
 man was excessive. We will award that claimant be restored to
 his former Seniority as a track foreman, with the right to bid on
 vacancies in accordance with his foreman seniority.' WP will
 deny any claim for compensation in behalf of claimant.

                      A W A H D


        Claim sustained to the extent indicated in Findings.


                      ORDER-


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

                    Chairman, Neutral Member


Car per Member- Labor Member

 Dated: ~7 ~7 ~`/~ .