SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 986
Case No. 75
Docket No. NEC-BMWE-SD-1990D
PARTIES: Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
TO
DISPUTE: National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
FINDINGS:
Claimant D. Harris was employed as a work equipment engineer by
Carrier at its Odenton, Maryland, facility. On August 12, 1987,
Claimant was directed to attend a hearing in connection with the
following charges:
1. You are in violation of Rule 4204(B) of Amtrak Safety Rules which
reads in part[:] maintain constant look out
in
the direction in
which moving, particularly on curve, at switch, frog, crossing or
intersection for obstruction or other equipment or machinery shall
be headed in the direction in which moving, if practicable,
otherwise, make arrangements that will assure constant look out
being maintained in the direction in which moving.
Specifications: In that on Monday, August 10, 1987, at
approximately 12:30 a.m. in the vicinity of MP 113.9 Long siding,
you being the operator of the Burro Crane #A58803, is [sic]
responsible for maintaining a constant look out in the direction in
which moving; also in seeing that the equipment being operated is
facing the direction moving, if practicable and thus, is [sic] to
be held directly responsible for the derailment of the Burro Crane
#8803 occuring in the vicinity of MP 113.9 on Long siding, at
approximately 12:30 a.m. on August 10, 1987.
2. You are in violation of Rule #104, Paragraph #4 of the Amtrak
Operating Rules and Instructions, which reads in part, Employees
must be familiar with locations of derails, engines or cars must
not pass over derails in derailing position. Derails must be kept
in derailing position except when removed to permit movement.
Specifications: In that on Monday, August 10, 1987, at
approximately 12:30 a.m. in the vicinity of MP 113.9 Long siding,
you being the operator of the Burro Crane #A58803 is [sic]
responsible for maintaining a constant look out in the direction in
which moving. Also in seeing that the equipment being operated is
facing in the direction moving, if practicable and thus is [sic] to
be held directly responsible for the derailment of the Burro Crane
#8803 occurring in the vicinity of MP 113.9 on Long siding, at
approximately 12:30 a.m. on August 10, 1987.
The hearing took place on October 12, 1987, and as a result, Claimant
1
q8~
~s
was assessed a twenty-day suspension. The Organization thereafter
filed a claim on Claimant's behalf, challenging the discipline.
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 failing to
act properly to avoid the derailment of the Burro Crane on the date in
question. The Carrier was well within its rights to issue discipline
to the Claimant.
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 the case at hand,
given the record of the Claimant and the nature of the offense, this
Board finds nothing unreasonable about the 20-day suspension issued to
the Claimant. Therefore, the claim must be denied.
Award:
Claim denied.
(`Neutral Member
_m
Car ier Member r anization Member
Date:
2