SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 986
Case No. 82
Docket No. NEC-BMWE-SD-1987D
PARTIES: Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
TO
DISPUTE: National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
FINDINGS:
Claimant J.C. Wilson was employed as a trackman by Carrier in
Baltimore, Maryland. On August 18, 1987, Claimant was notified to
attend a formal investigation of the charge:
Violation of Amtrak Rules of Conduct, Rule B, which reads in part:
"Safety is of first importance in the operation of the railroad and
therefore, is the most important aspect of an employee's duties."
Violation of Amtrak Safety Rules and Instructions, Rule 4061(A),
which reads: "Use handle punch, handle cutter or handle spike
lifter only when: (a) It is equipped with hose or other suitable
head protection on the striking head."
Violation of Amtrak Safety Rules and Instructions, Rule 4080, which
reads in part: "While using hammer, and chisel, or holding handle
tool for sledger, watch for . . . remove spawl before it flies. If
spike does not pry up readily, use sledge and spike lifter, with
suitable protection over head of spike. Do not strike claw bar to
start spike."
Specification: In that on Friday, August 14, 1987 at approximately
8:40 A.M. in the vicinity of M.P. 95.7, you were striking a spike
lifter with a spike hammer when said hammer chipped and the metal
fragment lodged in your right calf, which resulted in a personal
injury.
After a postponement, the hearing took place on September 22, 1987,
and as a result, Claimant was assessed a ten-day suspension. The
organization then 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 guilty finding.
Once this Board has determined that there is sufficient evidence
1
q8co-ea
in the record to support the guilty finding, we next turn our
attention to the type of discipline imposed. This Board will not set
asdie a carrier's imposition of discipline unless we find it to have
been unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. In this case, the
Claimant was assessed a 10-day suspension for very unsafe activity
which resulted in a personal injury. This Board cannot find that the
10-day suspension was unreasonable given the nature of the offense.
Therefore, this claim must be denied.
Award: _
Claim denied.
Neutral Memb,r
I
Lol
Carrier embe` rganization Member
Date:
2