' SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 986
CASE NO. 117
DOCKET NO. NEC-BMWE-SD-2453D
PARTIES: BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES
TO
DISPUTE: NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK)
DISPUTE: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood:
1. The five-calendar day suspension of Claimant
John D. Harrison for alleged violation of N.R.P.C.
Rules of Conduct Rules B and D on February 8,
1989, was unwarranted.
2. The Carrier has not given the proper
consideration to the facts in this case and has
acted viciously towards the Claimant.
3. The Claimant should be exonerated of this
charge and his record concerning this matter
should be expunged.
FINDINGS:
Claimant John D. Harrison was employed by the Carrier as a
trackman at Baltimore, Maryland.
On February 15, 1989, the Carrier notified the Claimant of the
following charges:
Violation of N.R.P.C. Rules of Conduct Rules B and D
Specification: In that on Wednesday, February 8,
1989, you were a passenger in Vehicle AA64394, not
wearing a seat belt when you sustained a personal
injury, contrary to Amtrak Safety Rule and
Instruction 4239(a)(b).
After one postponement, the disciplinary investigation was held on
March 23, 1989. On April 7, 1989, the Carrier notified the Claimant
that he had been found guilty of all charges and was assessed
discipline of a five-calendar day suspension. On April 18, 1989, the
Claimant filed an appeal of that discipline, which appeal was denied
by the Carrier on May 17, 1989. Thereafter, the Organization filed a
claim on Claimant's behalf, challenging his suspension.
_ /r>
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 failed to wear a seat belt in violation
of the Carrier Rules B and D.
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 action
to have been unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious.
A five day suspension is the usual discipline for failing to wear
a seat belt. This Claimant has a previous suspension for a violation
of a safety rule. This Board cannot find any reason to amend the
action of the Carrier. Therefore, the claim will be denied.
Award
Claim denied. _
Peter R. M ers
Neutral Member
~(~r-e~tc~ ~-
fir.
terrier Member rganlZatlon Member
lb-1-
9o
2