SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 986
Case No. 51
Docket No. NEC-BMWE-SD-1825D
PARTIES: Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
TO
DISPUTE: National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
FINDINGS:
Claimant V. Coleman was employed as a welder's helper by Carrier
at Baltimore, Maryland. On January 28, 1987, Claimant was notified to
attend an investigation of the charge:
Violation of NRPC Amtrak's Rules of Conduct, which reads:
"Employees must obey instructions, directions, and orders from
Amtrak supervisory personnel and officers except when confronted by
a clear and immediate danger to themselves, property, or the
public. InsuboYdinate conduct will not be tolerated.
Specification: Due to incident that occurred on January 19, 1987
at approximately 2:00 a.m. at B and P Tower at which time you were
instructed to return to your job location by Asst. Supervisor, R.R.
Nunnelee and you did not comply with Mr. Nunnelee's instructions.
The hearing was held on February 10, 1987, and as a result, Claimant
was assessed a ten-day suspension. The Organization thereafter filed
a claim on Claimant's behalf, challenging the suspension.
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 was guilty of the offense of
insubordinate conduct.
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 it to be
unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. In the case at hand, the
Claimant engaged in insubordinate conduct, which can often lead to
discharge. Therefore, we find nothing unreasonable about the ten (10)
1
' r
S(o
-51
day suspension that he received. Consequently, the claim will be
denied.
Award:
Claim denied.
Neutral Member
Date:
f-(-
( L -'R
k
2