SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 986
Case No. 70
Docket No. NEC-BMWE-SD-1887D
PARTIES: Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
TO
DISPUTE: National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
FINDINGS:
Claimant D. May is employed as a work equipment engineer by
Carrier at its Winslow, New Jersey, facility. On June 16, 1987,
Claimant was directed to attend a hearing in connection with the
following charges:
Violation 'of NRPC (Amtrak) 2525 (-9/8-5) Rules of Conduct, Rule 'IL"
which reads in part: "Rule L . . . 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 . . ." in
that
Specification #1: On Monday, June 15, 1987 at the TLS Camp Facility
located on Spring Road, Atlantic City Line, Winslow, New Jersey you
failed to comply with instructions issued to you by Track
Supervisor, Mr. J. McLaughlin at 6:15 a.m. in connection with,
. taking a physical as outlined in th-e Northeast Corridor "Special
Instructions" Rule No. 1008-A1 Employee Physical Examinations which
was scheduled for you at 11:00 a.m. on Monday, June 15, 1987.
Violation of NRPC (Amtrak) 2525 (9/85) Rules of Conduct, Rule "O"
which reads in part: "Rule 0 . . Employees must not be absent
from their assigned duty or engage in other than AMTRAK business
while on duty or on AMTRAK-Property without permission from- theirsupervisor .
. . ." in that
Specification #1: on June 15, 1987 at the TLS Camp located on
Spring Road on the Atlantic City Line, Winslow, New Jersey you were
instructed by Track Supervisor, Mr. J. McLaughlin at 6:15 a.m. to
report at 7:30 a.m. to the TLS Office Car to be transported to and
from Philadelphia, Pa., in order to attend your scheduled physical.
You failed to appear at the
designated time
and place and left
AMTRAK property without permission.
The hearing took place on June 29, 1987, and as a result, Claimant was
assessed"a thirty-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,
1
a8c~-
70
and we find that there is sufficient evidence in the record to support
the finding that the Claimant was guilty of the offenses with which he
was charged.
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 have
been unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. In this case, the
Carrier imposed a 30-day
suspension against
the Claimant. Given his
background and.the nature_of the offense, this Boar.d,canpot find that
the action taken by the Carrier was unreasonable, arbitrary, or
capricious. Therefore, the claim must be denied.
Award:
Claim denied.
Neutral Member,
i
Car ier Membe
Date:D
(Cr(le
2