SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 986
Case No. 8
Docket No. NEC-BMWE-SD-1249D
PARTIES: Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees
TO
DISPUTE: Amtrak
FINDINGS:
On February 11, 1985, Claimant William J. McGrath was notified
that a hearing would be held into the charges that on February 11,
1985, he was insubordinate toward the shop superintendent. Claimant
was charged with a violation of Amtrak General Rule of Conduct I,
which states, in part:
Employees will not be retained in the service
who are insubordinate, dishonest, or who do not
conduct. themselves in such a manner that the
Company will not be subjected to criticism and
tos:; of good will.
Subsequent to the hearing, which, after several postponements, was
held on March 20, 1985, Claimant was found guilty and assessed a fourday suspension. The Organization contends that the evidence of
insubordination consists solely of uncorroborated testimony of the
shop steward which was contradicted by three other witnesses. The
organization argues that the testimony of the three witnesses
confirmed that it was the shop superintendent who was abusive toward
the Claimant. The Organization argues that the claim should be
sustained.
The Carrier contends that the shop superintendent instructed
the Claimant on how to perform his job and that the Claimant then
became irrational and abusive toward the superintendent and directed
an obscene remark toward him while also advising the superintendent to
perform the work himself. The Carrier argues that there was no excuse
for the Claimant's action, the discipline was appropriate, and the
claim should be denied.
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 with
which he was charged. Although there are some credibility questions,
it is fundamental that this Board does not have the authority to
determine questions of credibility and leaves those to the hearing
officer. The hearing officer in this case chose to believe the
superintendent; and, therefore, we are unable to set that
determination aside.
Once this Board has determined that there is sufficient
evidence in the record to support the finding of guilty, we next turn
our attention to the type of discipline imposed. The Claimant
received four days off for the wrongful behavior. We do not find that
to be excessive, unreasonable, or arbitrary, given the nature of the
offense. Therefore, the claim is denied.
AWARD:
Claim denied.:
---
. _h
~-G
Carri ·r Member Union Mvmbur
Date:
2