UTU: Award Summary Index

Return to Index

Discipline - Operating Rules - Violations

Public Law Board No. 7293-Award 47
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU vs. BNSF
Award Date: 2010-06-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of a Conductor who was dismissed account failure to properly sound whistle warnings. The Board found that the Claimant “subjected himself to discipline” but the offense did not rise to the level of permanent dismissal and reinstated the Claimant to service with all rights unimpaired, without pay for time lost and with a Level S, 12-month probation period to run from the date of the Claimant’s return to service.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6879-Award 161
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2010-05-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denied. Claimant allegedly did not line both ends of a cross over. During the hearing, claimant testified that one end was considered a turnout, and thus, that end was never lined. Trainmaster LaForce testified such was not the case, and that the rule required both ends be lined.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7293-Award 25
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU vs. BNSF
Award Date: 2010-01-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Partially sustained the claim of an Engineer for reinstatement to service and pay for time lost. The Claimant was cited for failure to control the speed of his shove movement and excessive coupling speed, resulting in the cars he was handling “raking” a passing train. The Board found that, although there was “a degree of merit” in the Organization’s procedural arguments, the Claimant had not been denied contractual due process. The Board also found that although the Claimant’s culpability in the incident was proven, based on his nearly spotless 18-year personal record, permanent dismissal was excessive and ordered the Claimant reinstated to service, without pay for time lost and modified the discipline to a Level S, with a one year probation period running from the date of reinstatement.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7211-Award 21
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties: UTU & CSX (B&O)
Award Date: 2010-01-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was suspended for 30 days from the service of CSX when found culpable of pulling out of E05 track and striking Q24105 departing out of track M02 resulting in damage to ETTX 800143 and derailing ETTX 909136. The Board finds that the Carrier met its burden of proof. The record showed that claimant did not know the location of his foreman when his assignment began to move; and claimant was ahead of his movement and should have control of his movement. In view of the seriousness of the offense and the claimant’s past record the Board saw no reason to disturb the discipline imposed.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7211-Award 22
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties: UTU & CSX (B&O)
Award Date: 2010-01-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Partially Sustained. Claimant was suspended for 30 days from the service of CSX when found culpable of pulling out of E05 track and striking Q24105 departing out of track M02 resulting in damage to ETTX 800143 and derailing ETTX 909136. The Board finds that the Carrier met its burden of proof. The seriousness of this offense clearly supports the assessment of a 45 day suspension. However, the Board finds the Carrier held the claimant out of service prior to the investigation and did not consider this in the assessment of discipline. The claimant should be paid for any time held out of service beyond 45 days.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7211-Award 23
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties: UTU vs. CSX (B&O)
Award Date: 2010-01-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Partially Sustained. The record reveals that Claimant Valentine was found culpable of failing to do the proper Class III brake test on July 11, 2007. The Board agrees with the Organization that the discipline assessed in this case was excessive. The claimant has over 35 years of service with one minor entry. The Board finds that the claimant’s suspension should be reduced to time served at the conclusion of the investigation. The claimant should be paid for any time lost beyond that time.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7211-Award 24
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties: UTU & CSX (B&O)
Award Date: 2010-01-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: The record reveals that Claimant Williams was found culpable of failing to do the proper Class III brake test on July 11, 2007. The Board agrees with the Organization’s position in this case. The Board also notes that the FRA’s Locomotive Engineer Review Board also found that CSX’s failure to show up for the hearing or notify the claimant was not in accordance with the agreement; and Carrier failed to abide by the Agreement in this case. The Board sustained the claim only to the extent of pay for time lost.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7211-Award 25
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties: UTU & CSX (B&O)
Award Date: 2010-01-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained. Claimant was suspended for 30 days when found culpable of failing to stop his train within ½ the range of vision ensuing in a collision, resulting in a personal injury and track and equipment damage. The Board finds the Carrier did not meet its burden of proof. Claimant testified that he operated in the same manner as he was trained. The Board agrees and therefore the discipline should be removed from Claimant’s record and he should be paid for all time lost.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6823-Award 116
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-12-14 00:00:00
Synopsis:
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6823-Award 119
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-12-14 00:00:00
Synopsis:
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 555
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-12-11 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was charged with operating his train in excess of the authorized speed and assessed a 10 day suspension. The Board finds the discipline administered cannot be held to be either improper or excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 556
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-12-11 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was charged with failing to notify his Engineer that he was exceeding the 10 mph speed while the rear of his train was on the third main, resulting in human factor derailment and damage to track and equipment. Claimant was assessed a 60 day suspension. The Board finds the discipline assessed cannot be held to be improper or excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 557
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-12-11 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was charged with failing to apply handbrakes on cars placed in departure track. Claimant was found guilty and assessed a 10 day actual suspension. The Board finds the discipline assessed cannot be held to be either improper or excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 548
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-11-16 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was charged with failing to properly obtain three step protection when he crossed within twenty-five feet of standing cut of cars with locomotive attached. Claimant was found guilty of the charge and assessed 15 days actual suspension. The Board finds that the discipline administered cannot be held to be either harsh or excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 550
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-11-16 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was charged with failing to take immediate action to stop excessive wheel slip resulting in damage to rail. Claimant was found guilty of the charge and assessed a 15 day suspension. It is the decision of the Board that the discipline be reduced to a 10 day suspension and claimant is entitled to be compensated for the additional time lost.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 551
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-11-16 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was charged with failing to take immediate action to stop excessive wheel slip resulting in damage to rail. Claimant was found guilty and assessed a 15 day actual suspension. The Board found the discipline to be excessive and reduced it to 10 days with compensation for additional time withheld from service.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6953-Award 36
Neutral: John L. Easley
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2009-11-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained-in-part the appeal of a Conductor charged with violation of restricted speed, Rule 6.28, when locomotive allegedly operated through switch improperly lined at South St. Paul, MN. Rule 6.28 is a speed rule. Movement was stopped prior to operating over switch; employee inspected switch and it appeared properly lined. Carrier failed to prove speed was cause of accident; discipline reduced, Rule 8.20, position of switches and derails.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6953-Award 37
Neutral: John L. Easley
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2009-11-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained the appeal of a Yard Helper alleged to have failed to secure cars at Eagle Grove, Iowa, Rule 7.6. The employee cut off the five east cars from a yard track, removing no brakes. Several hours later the remaining cars were found to have rolled onto the lead. The previous crew testified to having set brakes on both ends of the track, however the manager found no brakes on the cars. The track was secured when the employee removed the cars.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7145-Award 16
Neutral: Gerald E. Wallin
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-11-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained: Claimant was charged with failure to properly secure cars with hand brakes. Local Chairman Rick Lima did an excellent job in extracting testimony from RFE that he observed brakes shoes against the wheel. This was crucial testimony to show that the other officer who brought the charges had not sufficiently investigated the incident.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6754-Award 54
Neutral: James E. Conway
Parties: UTU vs. NS
Award Date: 2009-10-26 00:00:00
Synopsis:
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6754-Award 50
Neutral: James E. Conway
Parties: UTU vs. NS
Award Date: 2009-10-19 00:00:00
Synopsis:
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6605-Award 102
Neutral: Charles P. Fischbach
Parties: UTU vs. NS
Award Date: 2009-10-19 00:00:00
Synopsis:
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6754-Award 51
Neutral: James E. Conway
Parties: UTU vs. NS
Award Date: 2009-10-18 00:00:00
Synopsis:
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7145-Award 14
Neutral: Gerald E. Wallin
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-10-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Allowed on Property: Prior to the Board hearing the case, the Carrier agreed to allow the claim. Claimant was charged with failure to place a fusee on each side of a public highway crossing in connection with a mandatory directive. Operating Rule 100-E requires that fusees be placed on both sides of the crossing when the gates and lights are not working. In this case, the gates and lights were working; therefore we held there was not a violation of the rule. The local carrier officer had stated that the directive indicated the lights and gates were not working; thus the claimant had to place a fuse on both sides of the crossing. We held that this was not the application of the rule as the rule provides for protection as to the actual conditions upon arrival at the road crossing. Labor relations agreed and allowed the claim on the property; they overturned the five days actual suspension and cleared the record.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7293-Award 19
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU vs. BNSF
Award Date: 2009-10-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies the claim of a Conductor for removal of a Level S, 30-day record suspension, and pay for attending investigation. In an attempt to take up an old Track Warrant, the on-duty Dispatcher mistakenly referenced the Claimant’s current Track Warrant and the Claimant failed to catch the Dispatcher’s error on his read-back, resulting in the Claimant’s train occupying a Main Track without authority. Although the Board found the Dispatcher “had a shared culpability” in the matter, it also found that the Claimant “was not paying attention to his duties.”
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7293-Award 20
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU vs. BNSF
Award Date: 2009-10-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies the claim for reinstatement of the same Conductor involved in Case No. 19 of this Board, who was dismissed for occupying a main track without authority (this is an entirely different incident from that involved in Case No. 19.) In this case, the Claimant’s train had simply exceeded the limits of its Track Warrant. The Board found that the Carrier met its burden of proof and that the Claimant’s record justified dismissal.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7293-Award 22
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU vs. BNSF
Award Date: 2009-10-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: In a previously issued Interim Award, the Board ordered the Claimant in this case returned to service. In its final Award, the Board laid out its rationale for its decision to reinstate the Claimant and rendered its decision to deny our claim for pay in a case involving an Engineer dismissed for a red signal violation. The Board found “somewhat prejudicial” the conducting officer’s questioning of a Carrier witness about a previous, completely unconnected red signal violation the Claimant was supposedly involved in and modified the discipline to time out of service.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6754-Award 52
Neutral: James E. Conway
Parties: UTU vs. NS
Award Date: 2009-10-12 00:00:00
Synopsis:
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 545
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-10-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was charged and dismissed from service for failing to verify the engine he cut off was in the clear of all other tracks resulting in a sideswipe collision. The Board finds Carrier has produced sufficient evidence to justify its finding that claimant was guilty of the charge against him and this action was neither improper nor unwarranted.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7108-Award 27
Neutral: Lewis L. Ellsworth
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2009-09-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained the appeal of a Conductor charged with alleged responsibility for failing to stop train before passing red signal. Blizzard conditions prevailed, and questions regarding the braking ability of the train were unanswered by the carrier. LERB found that the engineer was properly performing his duties. The conductor had no reason to believe that the train would not stop.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6605-Award 97
Neutral: Charles P. Fischbach
Parties: UTU vs. NS
Award Date: 2009-09-18 00:00:00
Synopsis:
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6605-Award 96
Neutral: Charles P. Fischbach
Parties: UTU vs. NS
Award Date: 2009-09-18 00:00:00
Synopsis:
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 535
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-09-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was charged with derailing one set of wheels when the locomotive ran over a derail not seen by Claimant and was dismissed from service. The Neutral finds that Carrier has produced sufficient evidence to justify its finding that claimant was guilty of the charge against him.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6754-Award 53
Neutral: James E. Conway
Parties: UTU vs. NS
Award Date: 2009-09-01 00:00:00
Synopsis:
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6880-Award 42
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-08-28 00:00:00
Synopsis: This was the case of a 2 1/2- year employee on a crew that saw a "ghost signal" and operated by a stop indication. The issue was settled on the property through a leniency reinstatement.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6880-Award 43
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-08-28 00:00:00
Synopsis: This case involved a crew that operated past a signal [under rules in place on the Norfolk Southern Railroad], which they believed displayed lunar over red and over a moveable frog, without observing the position of the frog. We argued that the crew had not been trained in the handling of moveable frogs, nor were they properly educated in Norfolk Southern signal aspects. The local chairman was also able to develop testimony that the signal was changed after the incident to reduce glare on the lamps that might be misconstrued as a lunar aspect. This evidence was key to the neutral's finding that there were mitigating circumstances to proven rule violations and the employee should be returned to work, albeit with no back pay and "on a last chance basis". Claimant had just returned to work on a leniency basis from a previous dismissal.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7293-Award 14
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU vs. BNSF
Award Date: 2009-08-24 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies the claims of an Engineer and Conductor who were dismissed account failure to stop short of a signal displaying a stop indication, making an unauthorized reverse move, and dishonesty. Citing the Claimants' attempts to cover up the track authority violation by backing their train (without authority) and not reporting the incident, the Board found no basis to substitute its judgment for that of the Carrier.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 529
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-08-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was charged with failing to properly secure a cut of unattended cars and failing to use a company provided brake stick when one was available. Claimant was suspended for 10 days. The Neutral ruled that the Carrier had produced substantial evidence to justify its finding that claimant was guilty of the charge against him.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 530
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-08-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was suspended for 15 days when he was found at fault for failing to operate a switch with both hands, to stretch the slack after making coupling, place 6 cars in a track of 25 cars for a total of 31 cars and failing to ascertain that the track would hold the cars before shoving it. The Board finds the discipline assessed cannot be held to be either harsh or excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 531
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-08-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was suspended for 30 days when he was found at fault when he set off cars in track Y03 closing angle cocks on both ends of setoff and failing to apply handbrakes. According to Neutral Lynch the discipline assessed was neither harsh nor excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6059-Award 527
Neutral: F. T. Lynch
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-07-16 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was charged with failing to properly secure his train when he only placed one handbrake on 15 cars stopping less than the required 50 feet prior to a coupling and placing his hand in a pinch point. Neutral F. T. Lynch finds that the Carrier has produced substantial evidence to justify its finding that claimant was guilty of the charges against him. There is no justification for this Board to attempt to interfere with the discipline administered.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7211-Award 2
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties: UTU vs CSX (B&O)
Award Date: 2009-06-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denied. Claimant was dismissed for failing to apply a minimum of 10 percent, but not less than one hand brake to hold cars left standing on a track, resulting in a major derailment. The Board finds in view of the seriousness of the offense, the claimant’s short tenure and poor record that there was no reason to disturb the discipline imposed.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7211-Award 8
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties: UTU vs. CSX (B&O)
Award Date: 2009-06-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Partially Sustained. Claimant was dismissed for passing an absolute signal without permission of the UP Dispatcher and failing to sound the engine horn at multiple highway grade crossings. The Board finds that the record showed the claimant’s engineer was returned to service by PLB 6926. Based upon the claimant’s past record and years of service, the Board will also return claimant to service without pay for time lost.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7211-Award 15
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties: UTU vs. CSX (B&O)
Award Date: 2009-06-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Partially Sustained. The Claimant was dismissed for failing to apply a minimum of 10 percent but not less than one hand brake to hold cars left standing on a track. The Board finds that dismissal in this case is excessive. The record showed that the claimant was confused as to what was asked him by his trainmaster at the time of the incident. In view of this circumstance and the claimant’s record, the Board will return the claimant to service without pay for time lost.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6879-Award 129
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-05-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was dismissed when their train entered a siding without authority in DTC territory. The "fixed" radio on the lead locomotive was operating improperly; accordingly, the conductor went to the 2nd locomotive and handled the receiving of the "blocks" from the train dispatcher. Thereafter, the conductor went back to the lead locomotive, had a discussion with the engineer and advised him of the block authority, albeit not entirely correct. The Board held that the engineer had a proper job briefing with his conductor and, in effect, could rely on the information that was given.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6879-Award 127
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-05-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was assessed fifteen days actual suspension for applying hand brake without using a brake stick. Local Chairman Chapman showed that a brake stick was ["kind-a"] not available at the location. The conductor and claimant were at an industry, and there was a brake stick in the back of truck. The conductor took the truck and drove back to the yard office to get some paperwork. While he was gone, claimant made the decision to operate the hand brake without use of brake stick. The board held, under the circumstances, that the discipline assessed was harsh and excessive and reduced the suspension to five days. Lesson: If you are in area where brake sticks are available, find it, get it and use it. If you have a valid reason for not using a brake stick, such as there is not one located within 100 miles, then secure the hand brake in accordance with the rules. However, if you only have an excuse for not using a brake stick — such as, the conductor drove off with it in the back of the truck — then wait until you get a brake stick. There is a difference between a reason and an excuse; know the difference.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6879-Award 128
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2009-05-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was involved in an incident whereby a requisite number of hand brakes were not applied. Claimant observed the other crew member use a brake stick and secure cars. The claimant was in a different location and upon observation of trainman using brake stick; he presumed other crew member was correctly performing his duties. Carrier held that claimant should have known that other crew member did not secure sufficient number of hand brakes. We argued that one crew member is only required to exert reasonable supervisory authority, especially when the other crew member is equally qualified. The Board agreed and overturned the discipline assessed.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6605-Award 98
Neutral: Charles P. Fischbach
Parties: UTU vs. NS
Award Date: 2009-05-14 00:00:00
Synopsis:
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7145-Award 1
Neutral: Gerald E. Wallin
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2008-12-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained: CSXT disciplined claimant (conductor) for [alleged] violation of Operating Rule 411 — not establishing positive identification, via radio, every 15 minutes while performing switching moves. Local Chairman developed testimony that Rule 411 did not require every crewmember to make the announcement, only that the announcement is made by a member of the crew.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6957-Award 118
Neutral: Joan Parker
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2008-11-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was dismissed for failing to stop and a crew member flag the crossing being notified of an activation failure; failing to proceed with caution at a maximum speed of 15 MPH when notified of a false or partial activation; failing to maintain a train speed consistent with safety, when operating at speeds up to 34 MPH over authorized speed. Neutral Joan Parker finds that “discipline has served its purpose, and that Claimant has learned from his mistake. The Board believes that the discipline in this matter should be corrective, rather than career ending. Claimant will be reinstated without back pay.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6879-Award 85
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2008-11-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant (conductor) was assessed ten-day actual suspension for failure to properly check switch points prior to and after lining a switch. Carrier officer testified that claimant had to get into the middle of the track and observe position of switch points before and after lining the switch. The Board held that the rule did not require the application endorsed by the Carrier.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5263-Award 236
Neutral: Robert G. Richter
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2008-10-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained the appeal of a Conductor allegedly in violation of Rule 7.1 and 1.13, leaving equipment to foul. Wheel of car was by yellow stripe on rail, but a car length from foul of adjacent track. Carrier manager observed set out made and took no exception at the time.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5263-Award 240
Neutral: Robert G. Richter
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2008-10-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained the appeal of a Conductor for alleged failure to comply with a yellow flag displayed without written restriction. Carrier managers placed yellow flag as part of operating test. Subdivision maximum speed was 60 mph; Rules require a restriction on a subdivision authorizing speeds greater than 40 mph to be in writing. The test was improper and conducted in violation of operating rules. The employee was not liable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5263-Award 246
Neutral: Robert G. Richter
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2008-10-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained the appeal of Student Conductor for alleged failure to stop before passing red signal. (See Awards 239, 245) Employee was copying track warrant in locomotive cab when other employees called out signals, and did not see signal until train placed in emergency stop.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5263-Award 245
Neutral: Robert G. Richter
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2008-10-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denied the appeal of a Conductor for alleged failure to stop before passing red signal. Train passed a yellow approach signal, reduced speed, but failed to stop for next red signal. (See Award 239)
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5263-Award 239
Neutral: Robert G. Richter
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2008-10-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denied the appeal of an Engineerfor alleged failure to stop before passing red signal. Train passed a yellow approach signal, reduced speed, but failed to stop for next red signal.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7180-Award 6
Neutral: Gerald E. Wallin
Parties: UTU vs. CSX (B&O)
Award Date: 2008-10-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was assessed 10 days actual suspension in connection with the report of an FRA inspector who observed claimant leave a locomotive consist unattended while taking a work break. On the unique facts of this record, the Board determines that the claim must be denied.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7180-Award 8
Neutral: Gerald E. Wallin
Parties: UTU vs. CSX (B&O)
Award Date: 2008-10-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claimant was assessed a 15 day actual suspension for violating the Carrier rule requiring certain radio transmissions and train inspections after the application of emergency braking to a moving train. The record contained substantial evidence in support of Carrier’s disciplinary determination. Claimant’s professed lack of knowledge of what happened does not absolve him of responsibility or culpability.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7108-Award 17
Neutral: Lewis L. Ellsworth
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2008-10-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained in part the appeal of a Yard Utility employee charged with alleged responsibility for failure to align switches resulting in collision and derailment. The employee was charged with violating Rules 6.5, 6.28, and 8.2. The Board found that the employee was in advance of the movement, thus did not violate Rule 6.5; the crew on the train did not properly respond to the employee's signals, thus he did not violate Rule 6.28. The employee was found culpable of violating Rule 8.2, because he did not align all switches for the movement prior to initiating the movement. The rule does not state this requirement, but the carrier argued that this was their interpretation of the rule. The Board accepted the carrier's interpretation, however reinstated the employee to service without pay.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5263-Award 229
Neutral: Robert G. Richter
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2008-09-22 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained the appeal of a Conductor charged with violation of restricted speed, Rule 6.28, when locomotive operated over derail. Rule 6.28 is a speed rule. Train was traveling 2 mph when told to stop. Carrier failed to prove speed was cause of accident; did not charge employee with Rule 8.20, position of switches and derails.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7186-Award 2
Neutral: Francis J. Domzalski
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2008-09-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denied - Claimant was disciplined when the RCO job he was operating was unable to stop prior to it striking set of engines that were operating down the ladder. The Board viewed this case in the manner of an individual operating an automobile that struck another car in the rear. If you struck the car, you're guilty, notwithstanding any outside issues.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7186-Award 7
Neutral: Francis J. Domzalski
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2008-09-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Partially sustained. Claimant was disciplined for coupling to cars on wrong track and departing terminal. Discipline reduced from 10 days to five days.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7186-Award 9
Neutral: Francis J. Domzalski
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2008-09-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denied. Claimant made a "cut" on wrong car, thus causing cars to depart the yard when they were destined for local customer. We asserted the discipline was excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7186-Award 10
Neutral: Francis J. Domzalski
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2008-09-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustained. Car was "kicked" in track, draw head mismatched, car derailed. Board held claimant was not responsible for swaying draw bar. LC Stroud did an excellent job in showing that car was "cut-off' on straight track, and the track was uneven.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7186-Award 17
Neutral: Francis J. Domzalski
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2008-09-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denied. Claimant left cars on ladder not clear of tracks. He was. planning to make an additional switching move. At the time of the incident the rules did not so permit.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7186-Award 20
Neutral: Francis J. Domzalski
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2008-09-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denied. Claimant did not separate cars 50 feet prior to adjusting drawhead. Carrier met its burden of proof.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7186-Award 24
Neutral: Francis J. Domzalski
Parties: UTU vs. CSX
Award Date: 2008-09-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denied. Crew operated through a switch. We believe the Board erred in this case, as claimant was not in location to observe the switch; the movement was under control of another employee.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7053-Award 13
Neutral: Joan Parker
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2008-05-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denied the appeal of an Engineer charged with allegedly operating through an improperly aligned switch, reversed direction and derailed a locomotive. Locomotive was operated long hood forward, and view of switch was blocked.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 7108-Award 10
Neutral: Lewis L. Ellsworth
Parties: UTU vs. UP
Award Date: 2008-04-30 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denied the appeal of an Engineer charged with allegedly exceeding the maximum authorized speed, traveling 26 MPH in a 10 MPH restriction. Carrier failed to display yellow flags in advance to warn of the restriction; however, employee had written sped restriction in his possession.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5263-Award 223
Neutral: Robert G. Richter
Parties: UTU v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Award Date: 2007-05-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Partially sustains claim of conductor by allowing payment for all time lost and modifying his personal record to reflect a reprimand instead of a suspension. Claimant was disciplined for failing to promptly stop train after being advised sparks were coming from one of the cars and failing a train inspection by crew members. Initially, Claimant was notified of sparks by a passing train and immediately stopped the train and had a crew on light engines inspect his train. Upon release of hand brakes on the involved car, the train proceeded on and was again notified by a passing train that sparks were coming from one of the cars. This time the Claimant notified the dispatcher that he was going to proceed until the train passed the hot box detector and then stop and inspect the train. The Claimant then discovered flat spots on one of the cars and set the car out. The Board finds that the Carrier has met its burden of proof on the violation of not promptly stopping the train, however, the Claimant did not violate the train inspection rule. The Board also notes that in as much as the crew was in contact with the dispatcher the discipline will be reduced to a reprimand. Organization's concurrence and Carrier's dissent attached.

Public Law Board No. 4269-Award 521
Neutral: Don B. Hays
Parties: CSX Transportation, Inc. v. UTU
Award Date: 2007-05-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of conductor for removal of a 5-day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to place himself in a position to properly inspect a passing train. The Board notes contradictions in the testimony of the carrier manager who set up the efficiency test and sustains the claim on the basis of carrier's proof deficiency.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6879-Award 46
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
Award Date: 2007-03-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of engineer by reducing discipline of dismissal to a 6-month suspension and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with failure to line a switch back for mainline movement before releasing the block and switch to the dispatcher. While noting the appropriateness of discipline, in this case permanent dismissal is too harsh. The reinstatement of Claimant is conditioned upon his satisfying the return-to-work requirements. Failure to do so will result in the carrier’s initial dismissal action being reinstated.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5760-Award 133
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co.
Award Date: 2007-02-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of conductor for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant was dismissed for failure to timely report a personal injury - carpal tunnel syndrome - that he listed as an on-the-job injury. The Board notes that this condition is one which is accumulative, however, Claimant had a responsibility to notify the carrier timely when the condition required physician treatment. He failed to do so and there is no evidence to allow the Board to substitute its judgment for that of the carrier.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5760-Award 134
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co.
Award Date: 2007-02-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of conductor for reinstatement to service and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to timely report an alleged on-duty personal injury related to "back, neck and knee problems". The Board finds from the record ample evidence to support the Carrier's position and the claim to set aside the discipline is denied.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6823-Award 48
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
Award Date: 2007-02-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of trainman for removal of a 5-day suspension and pay for all time lost, including pay for attending the investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failing to use positive identification as required by the rules when communicating with his engineer. The charges were brought against Claimant because of the radio transmission overhead by a Trainmaster. In sustaining the claim the Board finds that carrier failed in its burden of proof, the engineer of the assignment was absent from the investigation and while the foreman testified that he, too, failed to use positive identification on the date in question he was not charged with any rule violation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6823-Award 44
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
Award Date: 2007-02-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of trainman for removal of what amounted to a 58-day actual suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to report an alleged on-duty injury in violation of the operating rules and for conduct unbecoming when he allegedly requested two days pay in lieu of filing an injury report. Without addressing the merits, the Board finds that Claimant was denied the due process of a fair and impartial trial because of the extremely poor record and the carrier’s untimely issuance of the disciplinary suspension.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5263-Award 213
Neutral: Robert G. Richter
Parties: UTU v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Award Date: 2007-01-22 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of conductor for reinstatement to service and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to stop his train for an absolute red signal. Claimant was on the radio writing down orders from the dispatcher and Maintenance of Way foreman and bent over to look out the cab window. Upon seeing the red signal he took immediate action to put the train in emergency, but the train ran the red signal. On appeal of the discipline by the local chairperson, the carrier Superintendent referred to an additional rule claimant allegedly violated but with which he was not charged. The Board holds that the carrier failed to meet its burden of proving the rule violation and sustains this claim accordingly. Organization's concurring opinion and carrier's dissent attached.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5944-Award 68
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU v. Norfolk and Western Railway Co.
Award Date: 2007-01-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Synopsis: Denies claim of conductor for removal of a 30-day actual suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for her responsibility in connection with passing a stop signal by some 183 feet and operating at excessive speed after passing an approach signal. Claimant admitted to failing to be attentive to the signals, albeit due to inspecting a passing train. The Board holds that despite this being Claimant’s first day on the job, she just completed a five (5) month training to prepare for these real life consequences of being responsible for safe and efficient operation of a train.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6903-Award 15
Neutral: Thomas N. Rinaldo
Parties: UTU v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
Award Date: 2006-12-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of engineer by reducing discipline of dismissal to a 30-day suspension and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was withheld from service and later dismissed for his responsibility in passing a stop signal. It should be noted that the FRA revoked Claimant’s certificate for 30-days as a result of such incident. The Board holds that Claimant was denied a fair investigation when such was held in his absence and the carrier rejected the organization’s request to postpone same because Claimant had not receive proper notice. Moreover, the carrier was aware of this fact because of the U.S. Postal Service acknowledgement of the investigation letter never being delivered. Under the circumstances, the claim is sustained, although a 30-day suspension is appropriate.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6903-Award 14
Neutral: Thomas N. Rinaldo
Parties: UTU v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
Award Date: 2006-12-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Synopsis: Sustains claim of switchman for removal of a 60-day actual suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to make a proper air test. In sustaining the claim, the Board notes that the allegation is that Claimant “failed to make a proper transfer train air brake test.” However, the record shows that Claimant was in the process of attempting to make such a test and therefore there is not a rational view of the evidence to allow for a conclusion that he “failed” to make the test.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 5263-Award 211
Neutral: Robert G. Richter
Parties: UTU v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Award Date: 2006-12-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of conductor for reinstatement to service and allows pay for all time lost. Claimant, operating a remote control locomotive, was charged with violating a rule requiring the operation of moving equipment at a speed so as to allow proper stopping of the movement when a switch was run through. Upon review of the record the Board finds not one iota of testimony as to train speed when the incident occurred. While Claimant may have been guilty of a rule violation, it certainly was not the rule with which he was charged.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6711-Award 36
Neutral: James M. Darby
Parties: UTU v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Award Date: 2006-12-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of engineer for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant was dismissed for his responsibility in passing a red stop signal by some 2 ½ car lengths. Claimant acknowledged passing the signal, but contended that it changed from yellow to red shortly before they passed it and at a time when it was impossible to stop short. Prior to the investigation, Organization requested the presence of signal employee who conducted the signal test to appear as a witness, along with all test results for the day in question and several months prior. The request was renewed at the hearing. Carrier failed to respond to the prior request and the only carrier testimony was from the Director of Transportation who testified generally that the signal "checked out okay". The Board finds that carrier's failure to produce the signal employee at the hearing, and a copy of the signal test results, resulted in a fundamental failure of due process and sustains this claim accordingly.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6711-Award 57
Neutral: James M. Darby
Parties: UTU v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Award Date: 2006-12-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of brakeman by reducing discipline of permanent dismissal to an eight (8) month suspension, allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was dismissed for violation of the carrier's EEO Policy when he made a racially offensive comment in the presence of an African-American carrier manager. While finding Claimant guilty of the charge against him, and admonishing such behavior in the strongest of terms, the Board finds that given Claimant's 36 years of clear work history, the fact that this was not reflective of a behavioral pattern, and that Claimant attempted to personally apologize for his statement, permanent dismissal is too severe.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6901-Award 4
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties:
Award Date: 2006-06-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for reinstatement to service and pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for violation of operating rules when he admittedly failed to properly protect a grade crossing in the shoving movement of a tank car. The Board finds that the dismissal of Claimant was warranted, particularly in view of his long series of rule violations during a short history of service and under the Carrier’s Individual Development and Personal Accountability Policy (IDPAP).
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6901-Award 6
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties: UTU v. CSXT
Award Date: 2006-06-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant was dismissed for violation of several operating rules in connection with a switching move that included failure to make a brake test, crossing within 25 feet of equipment, failure to use proper identification when controlling train movement, and failure to apply hand brakes to standing cars. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the charges and in view of Claimant’s five (5) prior operating/safety rule violations in less than two (2) years service, dismissal was neither arbitrary, discriminatory, nor excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6880-Award 7
Neutral: John R. Binau
Parties:
Award Date: 2006-06-06 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Engineer for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. A derailment occurred during a switching movement due to Claimant’s inability to hear the radio transmission of the conductor controlling the movement. This fact was confirmed by the trainman who was on the engine with Claimant. The Board finds that while Carrier proved its case, in view of Claimant’s inexperience as an engineer the discipline is excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6879-Award 25
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU v. CSX
Award Date: 2006-05-16 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor for reinstatement to service with seniority unimpaired but without pay for time lost. Claimant, a 26-year employee, was dismissed for allowing his train to operate in violation of the Operating and Safety Rules, at excessive speed and failure to stop in accordance with signal indications. The Board finds that the Carrier fully met its burden of proof as to the Claimant’s culpability, however, reduces discipline of dismissal to actual suspension based solely upon Claimant’s 26-years of service with essentially a “clean” record pertaining to Operating and Safety Rule infractions.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6931-Award 1
Neutral: Lewis L. Ellsworth
Parties: UTU v. Kansas City Southern
Award Date: 2006-05-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for failure to protect the crossing. Claimant was issued a Track Bulletin notifying the crew to protect the crossing and a job briefing pertaining to same. Engineer did not stop short of crossing and Claimant did not advise him to do so because both individuals incorrectly “assumed” that the Carrier employees with orange vests were flagging. The Board finds that the Claimant was in violation of operating rules, but takes note of the fact that in 5-years of service Claimant has no prior incidents involving operational or safety issues and therefore the penalty of termination was excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 6879-Award 27
Neutral: Lynette A. Ross
Parties: UTU v. CSXT
Award Date: 2006-05-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Claimant by reducing discipline of dismissal to suspension, and allowing pay for time lost following the period of suspension assessed. Claimant was disciplined for violation of Operating and Safety Rules by walking between the gauge of the tracks and failure to remain alert and clear of all track movements. Organization contends that the case is procedurally defective because the investigating Carrier officer did not maintain impartiality and exhibited “biased conduct” during the investigation. The Organization also asserts that the Claimant had to walk inside the gauge of the tracks in order to locate the skates due to excessive vegetation, had been granted “complete authority” from the yardmaster and was alert to the movements on the track at all times. The Board notes that the Organization’s concerns regarding the conduct of the investigating officer to not be entirely unfounded, however, the Claimant was guilty of entering the gauge of the track. Even though there were mitigating factors, Claimant should have taken an alternative and safe course by staying outside the gauge and reporting the adverse condition to someone who could have corrective them. The Board finds discipline of dismissal to be harsh and excessive given the totality of the circumstances and in light of the Carrier’s established practice of issuing corrective and progressive discipline under the IDPAP, dismissal is reduced to suspension.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2330-Award 2
Neutral: Jacob Seidenberg
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific - (T&L Lines)
Award Date: 1999-10-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of a Conductor for reinstatement with pay for all time lost resulting from his dismissal for his alleged culpability for two separate accidents. In sustaining the claim for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost, the Board finds that with regard to the first incident, Claimant's conduct does not warrant complete exoneration, neither did it warrant dismissal. With regard to the second incident, the Board finds culpability on the part of the Claimant, but also equal culpability on the part of the engineer, who was not discharged, and it was therefore, inappropriate to dismiss only the Claimant.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3193-Award 23
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern Former NP
Award Date: 1987-07-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for reinstatement to service and pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for violation of operating rules and failure to comply with a train order restricting speed to 35 MPH. Organization raises the question of "disparate discipline" in that the engineer of the train has been reinstated to service, yet Claimant has not. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support Carrier's finding of rules violations. As to the question of "disparate discipline," the Board notes that Claimant has on two previous occasions been dismissed and reinstated on a leniency basis whereas the engineer has been treated in a like manner only once. Under the circumstances, the Board finds no basis to overturn the Carrier's decision.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1613-Award 267
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Georgia, Southern and Florida
Award Date: 1987-03-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of thirty (30) days' suspension from his service record and pay for all time lost. Claimant was assessed the suspension when he was found to be responsible for a pulled drawbar in his train after an emergency application of the brakes. A review of the record leaves considerable question, concerning his responsibility in this incident, and the Board is inclined to give Claimant the benefit of the doubt.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 61
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific Eastern Lines
Award Date: 1985-02-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakemen for removal of 15-day suspensions and pay for all time lost, including time spent attending investigation. Claimants were disciplined for violation of operating rules when they ran through a switch and fouled the main line causing delay to expedited trains. The Board finds from the evidence of record that Claimants were following the instructions given them by the conductor and therefore are absolved from responsibility under the cited rule.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2855
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1984-09-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a 60-day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in blocking a public crossing for two (2) hours and twenty (20) minutes while the crew was taking their meal period. The Board finds that Claimant used poor judgement when dismounted the caboose and started walking toward the head end before the train stopped and in view of his past record, the discipline assessed was not arbitrary or unreasonable.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2856
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1984-09-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of what amounted to a 60-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rule for allowing an unauthorized passenger aboard the caboose. The Board holds that Claimant has a responsibility under the rule to inquire whether unknown persons are authorized or unauthorized and under the circumstances the carrier was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable in the amount of discipline assessed.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2858
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1984-09-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman by reducing a 60-day suspension to 10 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for failure to acknowledge a burning fusee, during an efficiency test, in violation of the operating rule. The Board holds that absent evidence of any similar offenses in Claimant's record, the discipline assessed was unreasonable and arbitrary.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 746
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-C,T&E vs. Norfolk and Western
Award Date: 1984-09-11 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a 30-day deferred suspension, which activated a previous 5-day deferred suspension, and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to comply with instructions and properly complete an industrial switch list. The Board finds from the evidence that Claimant failed to complete the forms in the prescribed manner and the fact that a clerical error was made on the initial list does not justify further omission and errors by Claimant.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 63
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific Eastern Lines
Award Date: 1984-09-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a 21-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to promptly report a personal injury sustained while throwing switches. Claimant contends that he initially thought the injury was minor and attributable to old age. However, a few days later he sought medical attention and the injury was diagnosed as a back separation. The Board finds from the evidence of record that Claimant was aware of the rule requiring prompt filing of injury reports because of two (2) prior incidents and under the circumstances the discipline was neither arbitrary nor capricious.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 64
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific Eastern Lines
Award Date: 1984-09-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakemen for removal of a 5-day suspension and 30 demerits, respectively, and pay for all time lost. Claimants were disciplined for failure to report their engineer under the influence of alcohol. The Board finds from the facts of record that Claimants should have been readily aware of the fact that their engineer was in violation of Rule "G" and were at fault in not reporting his condition.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 68
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific Eastern Lines
Award Date: 1984-09-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Head Brakeman by reducing the discipline assessed by half and allowing pay for time lost, but denies claim of Conductor and Rear Brakeman for reinstatement to service. Claimants were disciplined for indifference to duty and allowing there train to be operating in excess of the maximum allowable speed. The Board finds from the evidence of record that conductor and rear brakeman took no action at all to bring the train speed down or contact the engineer and their dismissal must stand. However, the evidence indicates that the head brakeman did call the excessive speed to the engineer's attention. While Carrier argues that he did nothing else, the Board holds that if Carrier requires more than was done in the instant case, it should be spelled out by rule or bulletin.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 71
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific Eastern Lines
Award Date: 1984-09-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor by reducing a 30-day suspension to 25 days and sustains claim of Brakemen for removal of 15-day suspensions with pay for all time lost. Claimants were disciplined for failure to comply with Carrier bulletin pertaining to procedures when confronted with hot boxes and failure to properly observe a hot box detector display board. The Board finds that Carrier's conclusion that Claimants violated all parts of the bulletin cannot be supported by the evidence. There is no evidence of record that Claimant brakemen failed to comply with any portion of the bulletin and Claimant conductor shall have his discipline reduced because Carrier failed to given any specific weight to any portion of the charge.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 332
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line
Award Date: 1984-09-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Trainman for removal of a 30-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to have an approved railroad watch and insubordination. The Board finds that there is no basis for the charge of insubordination. Further, Carrier was aware of Claimant's difficulty in getting his watch repaired in spite of bona fide efforts to do so. Finally, the Board holds that Claimant did not receive a fair and impartial investigation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3195-Award 106
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-T vs. Norfolk and Western
Award Date: 1984-08-30 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of three (3) Trainmen for removal of a 15-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimants were disciplined for allowing their train to operate in excess of the maximum allowable speed in a restricted speed area. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the Carrier's conclusion of guilt and there is no justification for setting aside the discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3510-Award 5
Neutral: Herbert L. Marx, Jr.
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake and Ohio
Award Date: 1984-08-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant was dismissed for failure to take proper action so as to comply with speed restrictions which resulted in derailment. The Board finds that Claimant failed to comply with the rules requiring his action to insure proper compliance with the speed restrictions and there is no basis to interfere with Carrier's decision.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3510-Award 10
Neutral: Herbert L. Marx, Jr.
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake and Ohio
Award Date: 1984-08-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakemen for removal of 180-day suspensions and pay for all time lost. Claimants were disciplined for failure to comply with a train order requiring restricted speed in an area where track crews were working. The Board notes Claimants admitted failure to comply with the train order and under the circumstances the discipline assessed is neither excessive nor unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3598-Award 1
Neutral: C. Robert Roadley
Parties: UTU-E vs. Union Pacific - Eastern District
Award Date: 1984-08-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant was dismissed for violation of general operating and safety rules which resulted in a collision and injury to a crew member. The Board reviews all the evidence and facts of record and finds sufficient evidence to support the discipline assessed. The Board also notes Claimant's past record containing discipline for rule violation identical to those which are part of the instant case and holds that the Carrier's decision to dismiss Claimant was neither arbitrary, capricious nor unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3118-Award 1
Neutral: C. Robert Roadley
Parties: UTU vs. Union Pacific
Award Date: 1984-08-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for what amounted to a three (3) month and ten (10) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to stop at an absolute signal. The Board finds uncontroverted evidence that Claimant failed to stop despite signals from the ground crew and there is no justification for setting the discipline aside.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3400-Award 2
Neutral: David P. Twomey
Parties: UTU-C,T&Y vs. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe
Award Date: 1984-08-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor by reducing discipline of 30 demerits to 20 demerits. Claimant was disciplined for failure to make a walking inspection of his train while stopped and failure to make a rolling inspection of a passing train. The Board finds sufficient evidence that Claimant failed to make a walking inspection of his train, or direct his crew members to do so. However, there is insufficient evidence to support Carrier is conclusion that Claimant failed to inspect the passing train or direct crew members. Therefore, the discipline is reduced accordingly.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3400-Award 3
Neutral: David P. Twomey
Parties: UTU-C,T&Y vs. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe
Award Date: 1984-08-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman by reducing discipline of 30 demerits to 20 demerits. This is a companion claim to that decided in Award No. 2. In addition to the charges of failure to properly inspect the trains, Claimant was charged with giving false and/or misleading information to a company official. The Board finds from the evidence of record that Claimant was in fact inspecting the trains when confronted by the Carrier official. Therefore, there is no rule violation. However, there is substantial evidence that Claimant gave misleading information to the official when asked the whereabouts of his conductor.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3400-Award 4
Neutral: David P. Twomey
Parties: UTU-C,T&Y vs. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe
Award Date: 1984-08-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of 30 demerits from his personal record. This is a companion claim to that decided by Awards 2 and 3. Claimant head Brakeman was disciplined for failure to inspect the trains. The Board finds from the record that Claimant remained on the locomotive and made no attempt whatsoever to fulfill his responsibilities.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 910-Award 46
Neutral: Irving T. Bergman
Parties: UTU vs. Conrail
Award Date: 1984-07-31 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for reinstatement to service and pay for time lost, less deduction of outside earnings and unemployment compensation, if any, and all benefits to which he would have been entitled if he had not been dismissed. Claimant was dismissed for violation of operating and safety rules, including Rule "G". The Board finds from the evidence that Claimant was denied a fair and impartial investigation when Carrier failed to produce witness requested by the Organization whose testimony was essential in developing a full investigation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2599-Award 102
Neutral: David P. Twomey
Parties: UTU vs. Illinois Central Gulf
Award Date: 1984-07-11 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a 20-day suspension and pay for time lost, but denies claim of Brakeman. Claimants were disciplined for failure to properly secure hand brakes on cars so as to prevent them from rolling out of the track. The Board finds that Claimant brakeman placed the cars in the track and was responsible to properly secure the cars. This he failed to do. As to Claimant conductor, the Board finds no evidence to support a rule violation as he was protecting a crossing as the work was being performed.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 132
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern Former FTW&D
Award Date: 1984-06-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Switchman for removal of a 15-day suspension and pay for all time lost, including pay for attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failure to properly secure cars in order to prevent them from rolling out of a track which resulted in a derailment. The Board finds nothing in the record to support Carrier's conclusion that Claimant was negligent or that he did not exercise due care.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 133
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern Former FTW&D
Award Date: 1984-06-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Switch Foreman for removal of a 15-day suspension and pay for time lost, including pay for attending investigation, on the basis of the findings contained in Award No. 132 of this Board.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 137
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern Former FTW&D
Award Date: 1984-06-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a 10-day suspension and pay for time lost on the basis of the findings contained in Award No. 136 of this Board.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 142
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern Former FTW&D
Award Date: 1984-06-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor by reducing what amounted to a 75-day suspension to 45 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was dismissed for violation of safety and operating rules and failure to observe that a car was being dragged for 111 miles. The Board finds that Claimant was at fault for failure to observe the derailment, however, in view of the particular circumstances on the night in question and Claimant's long service and good record, the discipline assessed is deemed excessive. Organization's dissent attached.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2844
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1984-06-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Yard Helper for removal of a 60-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rule when he failed to report to proper Carrier official that a fellow crew member was asleep on duty and under the influence of alcohol. The Board finds from the evidence that the conductor and yardmaster were aware that something was wrong with the individual and they let him lie down in the caboose. Under these circumstances, where both the conductor and yardmaster outranked Claimant, the Board cannot agree that Claimant's failure to make an independent judgment and report to a still higher authority constituted a violation of the rule.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2845
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1984-06-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Yardman by reducing a 60-day suspension to 30 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for reckless driving, failure to stop and excessive speed. Claimant admitted to the charges against him, but contends that his actions were caused by emotional distress due to a fatal accident of a close friend who was working in the yard. The Board holds that while Claimant's actions cannot be excused, Carrier must give consideration to ameliorating circumstances where they exist.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 136
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern Former FTW&D
Award Date: 1984-06-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a 10-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to comply with a train order requiring that the train be stopped in order to protect a street crossing. The Board finds from the record that the Engineer began setting the brakes upon approaching the crossing, but then released the brakes before stopping the train. Under the circumstances, the Claimant had every right to believe that the train was going to stop as required.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3382-Award 2
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-C,T&Y vs. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe
Award Date: 1984-06-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed from after having been assessed 10, 20 and 30 demerits for failure to wear eye protection, a similar charge and being unavailable for call, respectively. The Board holds that progressive discipline has generally been accepted as appropriate. However, in this case, the discipline all came at approximately the same time; consequently, the Claimant was not placed on notice and given an opportunity to improve. While serious discipline is justified, permanent dismissal is excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3382-Award 4
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-C,T&Y vs. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe
Award Date: 1984-06-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. This case is similar to that decided by Award No. 2 of this Board in that Claimant received 50 demerits following three (3) separate investigations within a very short period of time. The Board holds that permanent dismissal is too severe and sustains this claim accordingly.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3382-Award 12
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-C,T&Y vs. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe
Award Date: 1984-06-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant was dismissed for absenting himself from duty and reporting late without proper authority, claiming wages which he was not entitled to and failure to operate his train in an expeditious manner. Several procedural objections are raised by the Organization, however, these are rejected by the Board. The Board finds that sufficient evidence has been established to support the charges against Claimant and there is no justification for overruling the decision of the Carrier.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 730
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk and Western
Award Date: 1984-06-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yard Foreman and Helpers for removal of a 5-day deferred suspension and pay for time lost. Claimants were disciplined for failure to properly perform their duties when they did not couple hoses on a cut of cars to be picked up by a road crew. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the charges against Claimant and there is no justification for setting the discipline aside.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 733
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk and Western
Award Date: 1984-06-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a 5-day deferred suspension and pay for time lost, including pay for attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failure to carry out his responsibilities to see that cars were properly set out in accordance with instructions. The Board finds that Claimant instructed his engineer and head brakeman as to the set out to be made and properly relied upon their experience to make the set out without checking their work. If it is the Carrier's desire to have conductors follow up on orders given to the head end crew, then it should be done by bulletin or instruction.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 734
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk and Western
Award Date: 1984-06-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a 5-day deferred suspension, which activated a previous 5-day deferred suspension, and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to set out the proper number of cars from his train at an intermediate point. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the discipline assessed and rejects the procedural objections raised by the Organization.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 735
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk and Western
Award Date: 1984-06-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a 10-day actual suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to detect a derailed car four (4) cars ahead of the caboose. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the decision of the carrier and there is no justification for setting the discipline aside.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2236-Award 62
Neutral: Nicholas H. Zumas
Parties: UTU vs. Western Maryland
Award Date: 1984-06-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Flagman for removal of a 10-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to comply with a train order which resulted in an emergency airbrake application. The Board finds from the evidence of record that Claimant failed to take appropriate action to insure compliance with the train order and was in violation of the cited rules.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2236-Award 60
Neutral: Nicholas H. Zumas
Parties: UTU vs. Western Maryland
Award Date: 1984-06-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Yard Helper for removal of reprimand from his service record, but denies claim for pay for time spent attending investigation. Claimant was charged with carelessness which resulted in the destruction of a portable radio that was entrusted to his care. The Board finds from the evidence of record that Carrier has not met its burden of proof as to the charge against Claimant. With regard to the claim for time lost, the Board holds that Organization has offered no evidence that Claimant was actually required to lose time from his assignment to attend the investigation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 725
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk and Western
Award Date: 1984-05-31 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a 30-day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to set a sufficient number of hand brakes to properly secure a cut of cars. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the discipline and there is no basis to overrule the decision of the carrier.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3167-Award 4
Neutral: I. M. Lieberman
Parties: UTU vs. Union Pacific
Award Date: 1984-05-24 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for pay for all time lost as a result of his dismissal from service and subsequent reinstatement. Claimant was dismissed for his responsibility in connection with failure to comply with the requirements of a train order. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support Carrier's conclusion of Claimant's guilt, including his own testimony, and the discipline assessed, which amounted to a suspension, cannot be considered arbitrary, capricious or excessive.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2831
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1984-05-21 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor by reducing a 20-day suspension to a 5-day deferred suspension and allowing pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for allowing his train to operate at an excessive speed in a restricted speed area. The Board finds from the evidence of record that Claimant was busy doing the necessary paperwork upon arrival at the final terminal and it would have been difficult for him to be aware of or do anything about the excessive speed considering the short distance involved. Under these circumstances, the discipline is reduced accordingly.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2839
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1984-05-21 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a 30-day deferred suspension and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failure to properly inspect his train to the rear which resulted in a car being dragged some 19 miles causing extensive track damage. Claimant testified that he did attempt to inspect the rear of his train, but was prevented from seeing anything due to a dense ground fog. This testimony is corroborated by other crew members, members of another crew working in the area and a clerk who was driving and working in the area. Under these circumstances, the Board finds insufficient evidence to conclude that Claimant's failure to detect track damage was due to his failure to properly perform his duties.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2843
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1984-05-21 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Head Brakeman and sustains claims of Conductor and Rear Brakeman for removal of 20-day suspensions and pay for time lost, including pay for attending investigation. Claimants were disciplined for failure to stop at a stop board in advance of a BN crossing. Holding in accordance with awards of other Public Law Boards involving identical claims of engineer and fireman of Claimant's crew, the Board finds sufficient evidence to support the discipline of the head brakeman. However, since the conductor and rear brakeman were in the caboose, the Board finds no support for a conclusion that they had any responsibility for the violation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 596-Award 152
Neutral: Leverett Edwards
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Missouri Pacific
Award Date: 1984-05-21 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claims of Brakemen for removal of 30-day deferred suspensions from their personal record and pay for time lost. Claimants were disciplined for their responsibility in connection with allowing their train to be operated in excess of the maximum allowable speed. The Board finds from the evidence and testimony of record that Carrier failed in its burden of proof as to the charges against Claimants.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2909-Award 79
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern Former C&S
Award Date: 1984-05-16 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakemen for removal of a 10-day suspension and pay for time lost, but denies claim of Conductor. Claimants were disciplined for failure to stop their trains for inspection and wire an accident report as required by the rule after their train struck a motorcycle that was lying between the rails. The Board holds that Claimant brakemen were not responsible for stopping the train for inspection. Rather, this responsibility rested with the conductor or engineer. In view of the foregoing, this claim is sustained accordingly.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 127
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern Former FTW&D
Award Date: 1984-05-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Foreman for removal of a 15-day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rule and accident responsibility when he allowed empty tank cars to roll down a descending grade without protection which resulted in derailment. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the rule violation and the discipline was not excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 131
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern Former FTW&D
Award Date: 1984-05-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a 10-day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules in allowing the engineer to operate the train at excessive speed without calling the matter to his attention. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the decision of the Carrier and the discipline assessed was not unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3233-Award 1
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T&C vs. Missouri-Kansas-Texas
Award Date: 1984-05-11 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost and denies claim of Conductor. Claimants were dismissed from service for failure to stop their train and flag a grade crossing as required by train order which resulted in a fatal accident. The Board finds from the evidence of record that in all probability, the accident was caused by the driver of the vehicle trying to beat the train across the crossing. However, this does not relieve Claimants from compliance with the rules and the train order governing their movement. The degree of responsibility and accountability of the conductor compels a denial of his claim, but the brakeman shall be reinstated subject to his passing the usual return to service examinations.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 717-Award 573
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR Co. (Former STL-SF)
Award Date: 1984-05-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Brakeman by reducing a sixty (60) day suspension to ten (10) days and allows pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for using his own car for deadheading instead of going by bus. While Claimant was permitted to travel in this manner in the past, he did not follow the accepted pattern of receiving permission in this case. However, the Board holds that the discipline was excessive and is reduced accordingly.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5444
Neutral: Gilbert H. Vernon
Parties: UTU vs. Southern Pacific - Western Lines
Award Date: 1984-05-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of 30 demerits from his personal record. As a result of a grade crossing accident, Claimant and other crew members were instructed by the Trainmaster to report to a hospital upon completion of their tour of duty. Approximately 43 days after the incident, upon request of a Trainmaster, Claimant filled out a Report of Accident Form and was thereafter charged with violation of operating rule. The Board finds that while Carrier may properly discipline employees for failure to report personal injuries, there is no medical evidence that Claimant sustained an injury.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2424-Award 91
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake and Ohio
Award Date: 1984-05-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Yard Conductor by reducing a 30-day suspension to 15 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for taking an excessive lunch period. The Board finds that while weather conditions were a contributing factor to the delay in returning to the yard, the discipline assessed is deemed excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3379-Award 13
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western
Award Date: 1984-04-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of a 20-day deferred suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rule when he failed to properly sound the whistle at a grade crossing. The Board notes that Carrier had properly posted a bulletin directing all employees to comply with this rule and, under the circumstances herein, there is no justification for setting aside the discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3379-Award 15
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western
Award Date: 1984-04-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of a 15-day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of Operating Rule when he failed to check that hand brakes were set on cars prior to detaching engines. The cars subsequently rolled out and derailed. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support Carrier's conclusion that Claimant was in violation of the cited rule.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3379-Award 17
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western
Award Date: 1984-04-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Fireman for removal of a 30-day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of Operating Rule when his train passed a stop and stay signal. The Board finds that the evidence of record establishes that Claimant should have been able to see the signal and while mitigating circumstances may warrant lesser discipline, the discipline assessed was neither harsh, arbitrary or unjust.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3379-Award 26
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western
Award Date: 1984-04-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yard Engineer for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant wad dismissed from service following investigation after he plead guilty to a felony charge in U. S. District Court. The Board finds that Claimant violated Carrier's rule and the Board has no authority to set aside the discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3379-Award 18
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk and Western
Award Date: 1984-04-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of a 15-day deferred suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to properly inspect his train which resulted in derailment due to a hot box. The Board find insufficient evidence to support Carrier's conclusion of Operating Rule violations on the part of Claimant and this claim must be sustained.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 180-Award 1139
Neutral: Nicholas H. Zumas
Parties: BLE vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1984-04-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Engineer and Fireman for pay for time lost from June 25 to July 20, but not from July 20 to September 15, 1982. Claimants were withheld from service pending investigation for failure to question the rear-end crew after passing a hot box detector and failure to promptly stop their train. The Board finds that Carrier improperly withheld Claimants from service pending investigation and they are therefore entitled to pay from June 25 to July 20. However, there is sufficient evidence to support violation of operating rules and the remainder of the time held out of service is considered a suspension.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3468-Award 28
Neutral: Fred Blackwell
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1984-04-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor by reducing a 60-day suspension to 30 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for failure to properly inspect his train while stopped and failure to observe his train enroute which resulted in a derailment due to journal failure. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support a finding that Claimant did not inspect his train enroute, however, his testimony as to why he did not perform a walking inspection of the train while stopped was not refuted by the carrier. Under the circumstances, the discipline assessed was excessive.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2823
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1984-03-30 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a 30-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for allowing his train to be moved past an absolute stop signal in violation of the operating rule. The Board finds from the record that the rear brakeman, who was in the caboose with Claimant, was also disciplined for rule violation and it was held by another neutral that he had no advance knowledge of the intended move. Therefore, it must also be held that Claimant had no advance knowledge of the move and the discipline must be set aside.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3195-Award 68
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western
Award Date: 1984-03-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman by reducing a 10-day actual suspension to a 10-day deferred suspension and allowing pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for passing a signal in a Stop and Stay position. The Board finds from a review of the record that both Claimant and the operator were at fault and this justifies a modification of the discipline assessed.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3195-Award 71
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western
Award Date: 1984-03-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Yard Brakeman for removal of a 10-day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with passing a Stop and Stay signal. The Board finds from the evidence of record that Claimant was 75 to 80 car lengths away from the signal and there is no justification for the discipline.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 100-Award 441
Neutral: Jack A. Warshaw
Parties: UTU vs. St. Louis and Southwestern
Award Date: 1984-03-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of 35 demerits and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failure to comply with operating rules requiring a walking inspection of the train when stopped enroute for any reason. The Board finds sufficient evidence in the record to support Carrier's conclusion of rule violation.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 909-Award 10
Neutral: Fred Blackwell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Conrail
Award Date: 1984-03-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Engineer for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed, following investigation, for violation of operating rules and Rule "G" resulting in a head on collision. The Board finds sufficient evidence to substantiate the operating rules violation, however, there is not sufficient evidence to support the Rule "G" violation. In view of Claimant's forty (40) years of service, his time held out of service shall serve as appropriate discipline.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 140-Award 5842
Neutral: David Dolnick
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific
Award Date: 1984-03-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for reinstatement to service with pay for all time lost. Claimant was dismissed for failure to attend a scheduled rules examination class as instructed. The Board finds that the record establishes without doubt that Claimant failed to appear as instructed and there is no merit to the claim.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2424-Award 114
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake and Ohio
Award Date: 1984-02-28 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service with all rights unimpaired, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for allowing his train to be operated past an absolute stop signal and failure to devote absolute attention to his duties. The Board finds that the time spent by Claimant out of service will emphasize the gravity of the situation and importance of taking prompt action.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 409
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line
Award Date: 1984-02-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of a 30-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in running a stop signal. The Board finds from the record that claimant cautioned his brakeman twice to look for the stop indication and the brakeman assumed responsibility for the rule violation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3476-Award 8
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1984-02-22 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Engineer by reducing what amounted to a five and one-half month suspension to 90 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was dismissed from service for failure to promptly report a personal injury to proper Carrier officials. The Board finds that while Claimant was remiss in not promptly and properly notifying the Carrier as to his injury, the record is not sufficiently strong to support the discipline assessed.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3419-Award 1
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Columbus and Greenville
Award Date: 1984-02-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Engineer for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed from service for violation of operating rules when he failed to properly inspect his engine prior to commencing movement which resulted in the death of a Mechanical Department employee. While Claimant was remiss in not inspecting his engine, the Board notes that maintenance employees also failed to properly inspect the engine before released to the engineer and this must be taken into consideration. Further, Carrier committed procedural errors and displayed prejudgment in determining Claimant's guilt and the dismissal must be set aside. Carrier's dissent attached.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 375
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line
Award Date: 1984-02-16 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of 30 demerits from his personal record and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failure to inspect his engine while sitting in a siding waiting for another train. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the rule violation that the discipline was not unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 399
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line
Award Date: 1984-02-16 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Engineer for reducing a 10-day suspension to 5 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. The Board finds from the evidence of record that claimant was guilty of operating his train in excess of the maximum allowable speed. However, Carrier based the discipline on violation of additional rules as well and the Board finds no evidence to support the additional rule violations.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2909-Award 69
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern (Former C&S)
Award Date: 1984-02-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a six (6) day suspension and pay for time lost (600 miles). Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in allowing his train to pass a red stop signal. The Board finds from a review of the facts of record that Claimant, on instructions from his engineer, was in a trailing locomotive and in no position to observe the signal aspects.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 121
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern (FtW&D)
Award Date: 1984-02-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of letter of censure from his personal record and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failure to properly inspect his train which caused flat spots on the first three (3) cars behind the locomotive consist due to brakes being set. The Board finds sufficient evidence as to Claimant's rule violation and the discipline was not unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3306-Award 1
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU-C vs. Union Pacific (NWD)
Award Date: 1984-02-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor by reducing discipline amounting to a 97-day suspension to 15 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was dismissed, and subsequently reinstated, for failure to promptly file a personal injury report with the Carrier. The Board finds from the evidence of record that Claimant was in violation of the applicable rule. However, there is no evidence of intent to defraud the Carrier and, under the circumstances, only minimal discipline can be supported.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3400-Award 1
Neutral: David P. Twomey
Parties: UTU vs. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe
Award Date: 1984-01-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman by reducing discipline of 30 demerits to 20 demerits. Claimant was disciplined for violation of Operating Rules which led to the derailment of his engine. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the assessment of discipline, however, under the circumstances of this case the Board finds that 30 demerits is excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 700
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1984-01-24 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claims of Conductor and Brakeman for removal of thirty (30) day actual suspension and fifteen (15) day deferred suspension, respectively, and pay for all time lost including pay for attending investigation. Claimants were disciplined for violation of operating rule when they entered into the main line territory without first receiving proper authorization. The Board finds that the hearing officer committed prejudicial errors, including but not limited to, making summation of a witnesses testimony and continual interruption of cross-examination by union representatives.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 703
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1984-01-24 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakemen for removal of fifteen (15) day deferred suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimants were charged with violation of operating rule when they were observed operating their train in excess of the maximum authorized speed. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support a finding of rule violation and the discipline assessed was justified.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1906-Award 313
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-T vs. Terminal RR Association of St. Louis
Award Date: 1984-01-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Switchman for removal of a fifteen (15) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for causing delay to his assignment when it took twenty (20) minutes to move a distance of 1.97 miles. Organization contends that adverse weather and track conditions on the night in question and the fact that switches had to be lined for movement contributed to the delay. Further, Carrier has not proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The Board notes that the degree of proof necessary in such cases is a preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and there is sufficient evidence to reach a decision that the amount of time it took for the move was unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 94-Award 338
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-12-22 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of yardman for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with the train passing a stop and stay signal. Upon review of the facts of record, the Board finds no responsibility on the part of claimant for rule violation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 94-Award 339
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-12-22 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of the rear end crew members for removal of a five (5) day deferred suspension, but denies claim of the head end crew members. Claimants were disciplined for failure to communicate with a passing train. The Board finds from the record, sufficient evidence to support a finding that the head end crew was guilty of rule violation. However, there is insufficient evidence to find any guilt for the rear end crew.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1883-Award 144
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Missouri Pacific RR Co.
Award Date: 1983-12-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman by allowing pay for time lost when withheld from service prior to the investigation, but denies his claim for removal of discipline and subsequent lost time. Claimant was charged with failure to comply with instructions and violation of rules when he failed to report for duty with a standard watch. The Board finds that Claimant was clearly in violation of the rules and discipline was warranted, however, it was improper for Carrier to have held Claimant out of service prior to the investigation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2089-Award 167
Neutral: Leverett Edwards
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-11-21 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of two (2) Brakemen for removal of reprimand from their personal record and pay for time lost attending the investigation. Claimants were disciplined for failing to have the current Book of Operating Rules and Timetable in their possession during their tour of duty. The Board finds that although Claimants did not have the above items in their possession, there are extenuating circumstances which must mitigate in favor of Claimants and the evidence is insufficient to support the discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3132-Award 6
Neutral: Dana E. Eischen
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Co.
Award Date: 1983-11-21 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Head Brakeman for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant was dismissed for violation of operating rules when he failed to take proper action to insure the safe movement of his train when he allowed it to pass a red stop signal and then failed to provide proper head end flagging protection. Organization contends that the dismissal of Claimant was discriminatory in that the Engineer was given a leniency reinstatement after ninety (90) days. The Board holds that if all things were equal, Organization's contention would have merit. However, Claimant's record is replete with rule violations and a dismissal and leniency reinstatement for virtually the same offense. In view of these circumstances, the Board holds that the discipline was neither arbitrary, capricious nor unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2955-Award 25
Neutral: Dana E. Eischen
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern, Inc.
Award Date: 1983-11-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman by reducing a thirty (30) day suspension to twenty (20) days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for failure to take prompt action to prevent his train from passing a red signal aspect. The Board finds from the record that Claimant was an employee of only five (5) months, while the Engineer of the train had over forty (40) years' service. Further, the Road Foreman who was also in the cab, was exonerated of all charges. The Board finds under the circumstances here involved, that the discipline assessed is excessive and is therefore reduced accordingly.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2955-Award 26
Neutral: Dana E. Eischen
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern, Inc.
Award Date: 1983-11-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a fifteen (15) day suspension and pay for all time lost. This is a companion claim to that decided by Award No. 24 of this Board, and is denied on the basis of the findings contained therein.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2955-Award 20
Neutral: Dana E. Eischen
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern
Award Date: 1983-11-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a 5-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was experiencing an air leak in his train and was instructed by the Lead Carman to "bottle the air" upon arrival at the final terminal so as to expedite repairs. These instructions were complied with and approximately 15 minutes after the crew marked off duty the cars began to roll through the yard. The Board finds from the record that a long-standing practice at this location was for crews to leave their trains with "bottled air" and the rule against this practice was not enforced until shortly before this incident. Under the circumstances, the Board finds that the discipline was unreasonable and excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2955-Award 21
Neutral: Dana E. Eischen
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern
Award Date: 1983-11-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of a 5-day suspension and pay for all time lost. This is a companion claim to that decided by Award No. 20 and is sustained in accordance with the findings contained therein.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3048-Award 2
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-E vs. Union Pacific RR Company Eastern District
Award Date: 1983-11-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of forty-five (45) demerits from his personal record. Claimant was disciplined for having the safety control pedal on his engine locked down by a hammer in violation of Carrier's operating rules. The Board finds that the evidence adduced at the investigation was credible, competent and probative, and there is no basis for concluding that Carrier had improperly exercised its discretionary right to accept testimony of its witness over that of Claimant.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 684
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-11-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a five (5) day deferred suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant, the head brakeman, was riding in the caboose at the time when Carrier Officials observed the train and determined that it was operating at a speed in excess of the maximum allowable. Carrier contends that he should have been aware of the train speed and taken corrective measures. The Board finds that there is no justification for the discipline assessed and it must be set aside.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 679
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-11-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a five (5) day deferred suspension and pay for time lost attending the investigation. Claimant was disciplined for responsibility in connection with a derailment and found to be in violation of an operating rule. The Board finds from the record that, while Claimant may have been responsible for the derailment, he was not guilty of violating the rule with which he was charged.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 683
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-11-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of a fifteen (15) day deferred suspension and pay for time lost attending the investigation. Claimant was charged with responsibility for a derailment and operating his train at a speed in excess of the maximum allowable. The Board finds sufficient credible evidence to support the conclusion reached by the Carrier and there is no justification to set aside the discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 350
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line
Award Date: 1983-10-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of 15 demerits from his record. Claimant was disciplined for violation of Operating Rules when he gave inadequate and untimely notice of his desire to mark off. The Board holds that Claimant was properly and fairly handled at all times, and the discipline was not unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 378
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line
Award Date: 1983-10-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of a 30-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of Operating Rule and operating his train in excess of the maximum allowable speed. Upon review of all the evidence the Board finds that claimant was fairly handled and based upon his past record, the discipline assessed was not unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3138-Award 11
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Central of Georgia
Award Date: 1983-10-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a 15-day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of Operating Rules when he received cars for his train and transported same to his final terminal without waybills. The Board finds that Claimant clearly violated the rules and the discipline was not excessive. The Board also notes that Organization's procedural objection that a copy of the investigation transcript was not promptly furnished could be grounds for a sustaining award. However, it has not been shown that Claimant's case was prejudiced by the defect.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3138-Award 12
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Central of Georgia
Award Date: 1983-10-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claims of Conductor and Trainman for removal of 30-day suspensions and pay for time lost. Claimants were disciplined for failure to promptly warn the engineer sufficiently in advance so as to avoid passing a stop signal. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the discipline and there is no ground for substituting its judgement for that of the Carrier.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3138-Award 14
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Central of Georgia
Award Date: 1983-10-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor by reducing a 30-day suspension to 15 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules when he left his engine for reasons other than to perform required duties. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support discipline, however, the discipline is deemed to be excessive under the circumstances.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3138-Award 15
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Central of Georgia
Award Date: 1983-10-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor by reducing a 30-day suspension to 10 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules when he made a reverse movement of his train without proper authority or flag protection. The Board finds that discipline is warranted, however, in view of Claimant's 37 previous years of unblemished service, the discipline assessed is excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1613-Award 386
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific
Award Date: 1983-10-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Fireman for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for failure to inspect a passing train and violation of speed restrictions. The Board finds from the record that discipline is warranted, but permanent dismissal is too severe.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1613-Award 401
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific
Award Date: 1983-10-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Engineer for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for violation of Operating Rules and excessive speed. The Board finds evidence to support the charges, however, in view of Claimant's length of service and previous record, permanent dismissal is too severe.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1613-Award 397
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Southern Railway Co.
Award Date: 1983-10-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Engineer for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for operating his train at a speed exceeding that allowable. The Board finds no question as to the violation, however, permanent dismissal is excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1613-Award 399
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E&,C vs. Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co.
Award Date: 1983-10-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Engineer for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for violation of operating rules pertaining to speed and brake handling. The Board finds that discipline is warranted, but permanent dismissal is excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 47
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific (EL)
Award Date: 1983-10-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor by reducing discipline of 45 demerits to a letter of reprimand, and denies claim of Brakeman for removal of 30 demerits. Claimants were disciplined for failure to conduct an air test in accordance with the rules when they added eight cars to the head end of their train. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support discipline, but in the case of the conductor, holds that while he relied upon the experience of his brakeman to perform the necessary test, that does not absolve him from discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 51
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific (EL)
Award Date: 1983-10-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of 20 demerits and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was charged with violation of Operating Rule when he failed to immediately inspect his train upon it being placed in a siding. Carrier, taking into consideration all of the testimony of record chose to place the responsibility on the Claimant for failing to have his brakeman initiate a timely inspection of the train. The Board holds that it is in no position to substitute its judgement for that of the Carrier and the discipline was neither arbitrary nor capricious.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 52
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific (EL)
Award Date: 1983-10-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of 30 demerits and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failure to make a proper inspection of his train, as required by the rules. The Board finds, based upon the testimony of record, that there is no basis to substitute its judgement for that of the Carrier and the discipline assessed was neither harsh, arbitrary nor excessive.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 910-Award 18
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Conrail
Award Date: 1983-09-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Trainman for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for violation of operating rules and using the excuse of an aggravated injury as a subterfuge to avoid work after being denied permission to lay off. The Board finds from the record sufficient evidence to support the charges against Claimant. However, in view of Claimant's length of service, the Board holds that he should be given one last opportunity to demonstrate his willingness to adhere to the rule. As a condition to reemployment, Claimant is subject to a six (6) month probation with the understanding that any infraction of Carrier rules will be appropriate subject for discharge.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 910-Award 19
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Conrail
Award Date: 1983-09-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Trainman for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Following investigation, Claimant was dismissed for absenting himself from duty prior to the completion of his assignment without proper authority. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the conclusion of the Carrier, however, in view of all the circumstances, permanent dismissal is too severe. Claimant is therefore reinstated to service subject to a twelve (12) month probationary period and this is his last chance to prove himself to be a worthy and desirable employee.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 41
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific (EL)
Award Date: 1983-07-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of 30 demerits and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failing to return a switch to its normal position after use which later resulted in the derailment of another train. The Board finds that Carrier has established by sufficient credible evidence the culpability of Claimant.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 40
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific (EL)
Award Date: 1983-07-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of 30 demerits from his personal record and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for violation of Operating Rules when he failed to "immediately" inspect his train after an unscheduled stop. The Board notes that the delay in inspecting the train was only two or three minutes, nevertheless, this was unacceptable to Carrier's officials who apparently insist upon a literal application of the work "immediately."
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 42
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific (EL)
Award Date: 1983-07-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of 30 demerits and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for various Safety and Operating Rule violations. The Board finds sufficient evidence of record to support the charges against Claimant and the discipline was neither arbitrary, capricious nor excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 43
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific (EL)
Award Date: 1983-07-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of 30 demerits, but sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of 30 demerits and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimants were disciplined for failure to comply with Operating Rules requiring an immediate inspection of their train when it stopped prior to arrival at the final terminal. The Conductor contends that the topography at the location where the train was stopped made it unsafe for the Brakeman to inspect the train as required and he instructed the Brakeman to remain on the caboose. The Board finds that Carrier did not abuse its discretion in finding the Conductor guilty of the rule violation, however, Claimant Brakeman was following the instructions of his Conductor and there is nothing in the record to show that he willfully or negligently violated the rule.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 44
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific (EL)
Award Date: 1983-07-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of 30 demerits and pay for time lost attending the investigation. The Board finds that Claimant, by his own admission, was in violation of the rules when he failed to be in a position to observe the move being made and personally supervise same.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3282-Award 10
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Union Pacific
Award Date: 1983-07-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service will all rights unimpaired, but without pay for time lost. During Claimant's tour of duty, he suffered a personal injury while throwing a switch. However, he did not believe it to be serious and the extent of the injury was not known until a few days later when he reported for his regular examination and surgery was necessary. Claimant did not fill out the required form until after his release from the hospital and he was thereafter dismissed by the Carrier for failure to promptly file the report. The Board finds that Claimant acted in good faith and permanent dismissal is not warranted.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 665
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-06-30 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a five (5) day deferred suspension and pay for time lost attending the investigation. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules and his responsibility in connection with the cupola screen being open on his caboose. The Board finds sufficient evidence of record to support the Carrier's conclusion of guilt.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 669
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-06-30 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a five (5) day deferred suspension and pay for time lost attending the investigation. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in allowing his train to operate at an excessive speed. Claimant contends that he was looking over his train on a curve and he was not in position to accurately ascertain the train speed. The Board finds from the evidence that once the error in train speed was discovered, no effort was made to decrease the speed. Under the circumstances, there is no justification for setting aside the discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 670
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-06-30 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yard Foreman for removal of a fifteen (15) day deferred suspension and pay for time lost attending the investigation. Further, pay for time lost resulting from a previous ten (10) day deferred suspension being activated. Claimant was charged with running through a balloon switch. The Board finds from the record that Claimant was guilty of a rule violation which resulted in the switch being run through and there is no reason to set aside the discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1312-Award 782
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Baltimore & Ohio RR Co.
Award Date: 1983-06-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yard Foreman and Helper for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimants were dismissed from service following investigation for violation of operating and safety rules and insubordination in failing to comply with the instructions of a Yardmaster. The Board rejects the many procedural objections raised by the Organization and finds that Claimants were accorded a fair and impartial investigation. Based upon all the evidence and facts of record, the Board finds no cause to interfere with the discipline assessed.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3007-Award 11
Neutral: John J. Gaherin
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern
Award Date: 1983-06-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a 20-day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was charged with Operating Rules violation for permitting unattended power to be left on a track resulting in a sideswipe of a departing train. The Board finds from the record that Claimant was clearly in violation of the cited rules and Carrier's action was reasonable.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5375
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1983-06-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakemen for removal of a 30-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimants were disciplined for violation of operating rules and failure to perform their duties in a diligent and efficient manner. The Board finds from a review of the evidence that Claimants were guilty of the rules cited and the discipline assessed is considered to be most reasonable.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5377
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1983-06-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman by reducing discipline of 30 demerits to a reprimand. Claimant was discipline for violation of safety and operating rules when he failed to cross over to inspect a passing train and he moved between cars of his own train as the other train was passing at a high speed. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the conclusion reached by Carrier, however, under the particular circumstances of this case, 30 demerits is deemed to be excessive.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5380
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1983-06-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of 45 demerits from his personal record. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rule when he remained on the Conductor's Displacement Board in excess of the maximum number of days allowable under the rule. The Board finds from the record that Claimant was engaged in outside employment during the time in question and he was using the Displacement Board as a vehicle to continue to engage in outside employment. Under the circumstances, the Board finds the discipline assessed to be reasonable.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5368
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1983-06-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of 60 demerits and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was found to be in violation of the operating rules when he failed to make, or direct, the rear brakeman to perform a walking inspection of the train when a stop was made. The Board finds from the facts of record that Claimant was clearly in violation of the rule and the discipline was not unreasonable.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5370
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1983-06-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a 45-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was discipline for violation of operating rules when he failed to bring his train to a halt after passing a burning fusee. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support discipline and in view of the seriousness of the offense, it is deemed to be reasonable.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2796
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1983-06-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a 30-day suspension and sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a 30-day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimants were disciplined for allowing their train to operate at an excessive speed which resulted in derailment and extensive damage. The Board holds that Claimant brakeman was in the locomotive where he should have been aware of the excessive speeds and taken measures to slow the train or bring the speed to the attention of the engineer. As for Claimant Conductor, the Board holds that he was in the caboose and had no means of communication with the engineer and he was not aware that the train was operating under restricted speed orders.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2800
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1983-06-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor by reducing a 30-day suspension to 5 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for filing an erroneous time slip claiming 10 minutes final terminal delay. Carrier's general order states that 5 minutes is considered sufficient of conductors to complete their paperwork and anything in excess thereof must be noted on the back of the time slip, which this claimant failed to do. The Board finds from the testimony that Claimant had good reason to claim the 10 minutes and his time slip was not erroneous. However, his failure to state the reason as required warrants only minimal discipline and this claim is sustained accordingly.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3369-Award 2
Neutral: John N. Gentry
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago & North Western
Award Date: 1983-05-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor by reducing dismissal to a 90-day suspension and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof, subject to the deduction of outside earnings. Claimant was dismissed for violation of operating rule when he failed to provide proper flag protection to the rear of his train. The Board finds that there was, in fact, a violation of the rule. However, under all the circumstances, permanent dismissal is too severe.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2955-Award 9
Neutral: Dana E. Eischen
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR Co.
Award Date: 1983-05-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of fifteen (15) day suspension and Engineer and two (2) Brakemen for removal of five (5) day suspensions and pay for all time lost. Claimant crew members were disciplined for violation of operating rules when they failed to properly inspect their train which resulted in dragging a derailed car some 2.5 miles and causing extensive track damage. Organization raises a procedural objection as to the notice of investigation, but such contention is rejected by the Board. The Board finds that the evidence clearly shows that Claimants did not comply with the rules cited and the discipline was not unreasonable.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 909-Award 1
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU-E vs. Conrail
Award Date: 1983-05-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Fireman for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed following investigation for violation of a foreign carrier's operating rules in that he conducted himself in a discourteous and disorderly manner and struck a company police officer. The Board finds sufficient evidence in the record to support the charges against Claimant, however, in view of his past record the Board holds that Claimant should be given another chance to demonstrate that he can be relied upon for responsible behavior at all times.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 964-Award 490
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Railway Company
Award Date: 1983-05-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yardman for reinstatement to service and pay for time lost. Claimant was confronted by a Yardmaster concerning an alleged rule violation and he became agitated and threatened the Yardmaster. Upon review of the facts and Claimant's prior record, the Board finds no support for this claim.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2608-Award 13
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU-E vs. Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway Company
Award Date: 1983-05-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of a ten (10) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to keep a proper lookout to maintain the safe movement of his light engine, which resulted in a collision with another engine. While the Board notes, from the transcript, that the Foreman of the crew takes full responsibility for the accident, the Board holds that this does not relieve Claimant of his responsibility under the applicable rules.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2608-Award 1
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU-E vs. Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway Company
Award Date: 1983-05-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of a ten (10) day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for playing cards while on duty in violation of the operating rules. The Board rejects the Organization's contention that the investigation was not timely held and finds sufficient evidence to support Carrier's finding of guilt.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2782
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1983-05-06 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Yard Helper by reducing a 60-day suspension to 15 days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was discipline for transmitting unnecessary and irrelevant information over the radio in violation of the operating rules. While the Board finds that Claimant did violate the rule, it was a relatively trivial violation and the result of bad judgement. Under the circumstances, the Board finds a 60-day suspension is unreasonable.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2786
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1983-05-06 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman by reducing a 60-day suspension to a 30-day suspension and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for failure to stop short of an absolute signal and running through a switch. The Board notes from the evidence that there was no air on the caboose, which was not known by anyone but the Conductor, and when it became evident that he could not stop short of the signal, attempts were made by hand signal to the engineer to stop the movement. The Board finds that Claimant was at fault for going through the switch, however, in view of the doubt as to who was actually controlling the move and the fact that the Conductor received a 60-day suspension, the discipline assessed to Claimant was excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2972-Award 2
Neutral: David Dolnick
Parties: UTU-T&C vs. Soo Line RR Company
Award Date: 1983-05-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for all lost earnings as a result of being barred from operating over a foreign Carrier's trackage. Claimant was barred from operating over the territory in question for violating Carrier's operating rules which resulted in an accident. The Board finds from the transcript and all evidence of record, that Claimant was unjustly barred from operating over the trackage and the claim for time lost has merit.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2972-Award 7
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU-T&C vs. Soo Line RR Company
Award Date: 1983-05-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a five (5) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules which resulted in damage to a car within the confines of an industry plant. Organization contends that the accident was caused due to faulty radio equipment. The Board finds, however, that the accident could have been avoided if Claimant would have positioned a crew member at the plant entrance in accordance with the established procedure to ensure the safety of the movement.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2972-Award 8
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU-T&C vs. Soo Line RR Company
Award Date: 1983-05-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a five (5) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for running through a dual switch while it was lined in the reverse position for the movement. Organization admits Claimant was at fault, however, argues that Carrier committed procedural errors which must nullify the discipline. The Board rejects the contentions of the Organization and finds that the claim has no merit.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2972-Award 9
Neutral: David Dolnick
Parties: UTU-T&C vs. Soo Line RR Company
Award Date: 1983-05-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of two (2) Switchmen for removal of five (5) day suspensions and pay for all time lost. Claimants were disciplined for their responsibility in connection with an accident caused by cars rolling out of a track and cornering another cut of cars. The Board finds from the transcript that neither Claimant checked to determine that the cars were properly secured and their negligence to do so resulted in the accident.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2972-Award 4
Neutral: David Dolnick
Parties: UTU-T&C vs. Soo Line RR Company
Award Date: 1983-05-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Switchman for removal of a five (5) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules which resulted in an accident and property damage. The Board finds from the record that neither Claimant nor any other member of either crew were at fault. The most responsible for the accident was the dispatcher who hesitatingly allowed two (2) trains to occupy the siding.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2443-Award 33
Neutral: Leverett Edwards
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Missouri Pacific Railroad - (T&P)
Award Date: 1983-04-29 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a thirty (30) day deferred suspension, which triggered a thirty (30) day actual suspension, and pay for all time lost as a result thereof. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rule involving the run through of a switch. Initially, the Board finds that the "due process" principle was violated by the Carrier, in that Claimant was charged with one thing, but disciplined for another. Further, after review of the facts and testimony, the Board finds that the finding of fault and discipline assessed is not in accordance with the facts developed at the investigation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2443-Award 28
Neutral: Leverett Edwards
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Missouri Pacific RR Co. (T&P)
Award Date: 1983-04-29 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Footboard Yardmaster for removal of a forty-five (45) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was charged with responsibility in connection with the derailment of a tank car and following investigation, was assessed discipline. The Board finds that Claimant's failure to comply with the pertinent requirements of the operating rules cited was the proximate cause of the derailment, together with Claimant's admitted failure to set hand brakes, or make sure they were set.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2443-Award 32
Neutral: Leverett Edwards
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Missouri Pacific RR Co. (T&P)
Award Date: 1983-04-29 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakeman for removal of a forty-five (45) day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimants were charged with operating rule violations, which resulted in sideswipe and derailment of a car fouling the main line of a foreign Carrier. The Board finds, after review of testimony and all the evidence, that Claimants failed to take the necessary precaution to insure safe movement and there is no basis whatsoever, for sustaining the claim.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 717-Award 523
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR (StL-SF)
Award Date: 1983-04-29 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor and one (1) Brakeman for removal of a sixty (60) day deferred suspension and pay for attending investigation, but denies claim of the other Brakeman. The Board finds from the facts that the responsible Brakeman was at the point of impact giving improper signals to slow the train and responsible for the rough coupling. The other crew members were acting upon his signals and they are not found to be responsible.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 717-Award 528
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR (StL-SF)
Award Date: 1983-04-29 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor and Brakeman for removal of a thirty (30) day actual suspension and pay for time lost and claim of Brakeman for removal of a sixty (60) day deferred suspension. Claimants were disciplined for their responsibility in connection with a hot journal mishap. The record shows that the train was stopped and the hot box located. Claimants determined that it was in such a condition that it could be moved to the next set-out, however, it failed just prior to reaching that location. The Board holds that the Claimants acted within the rules and in the best interest of the Carrier, as they saw it. Under the circumstances, this claim is sustained.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2443-Award 26
Neutral: Leverett Edwards
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Missouri Pacific RR Co. - T&P
Award Date: 1983-04-29 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Footboard Yardmaster by reducing a sixty (60) day suspension to a thirty (30) day suspension and allows pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules when he mishandled a dangerous car. The Board thoroughly reviews all the evidence and facts surrounding this incident and finds that while Claimant is, to some degree, at fault, a sixty (60) day suspension is too severe.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 111
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR (FW&D)
Award Date: 1983-04-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Switch Foreman and Helper for removal of a fifteen (15) day suspension and pay for time lost, plus four (4) hours attending investigation. Claimants were disciplined for their responsibility in connection with an accident when they shoved cars through two large roll-up type doors at an industry. The Board finds from the evidence of record, and by Claimants' own admissions, abundant proof of negligence and violation of Carrier rules. In view of the circumstances, the Board finds the Carrier was extremely lenient in its assessment of discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 112
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR (FW&D)
Award Date: 1983-04-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Switch Foreman and Helper on the basis of the findings of Award No. 111 of this Board.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 113
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR (FW&D)
Award Date: 1983-04-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Foreman and Helpers for removal of letter of censure from their personal records and pay for four (4) hours attending investigation. Claimants were disciplined for their responsibility in connection with a derailment when cars rolled out of a track due to insufficient hand brakes being set. The Board finds that the evidence contained in the transcript supports the discipline assessed.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 114
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR (FW&D)
Award Date: 1983-04-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Foreman and Helpers on the basis of the findings contained in Award No. 113 of this Board.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 119
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR (FW&D)
Award Date: 1983-04-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of letter of censure from his personal record and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was charged with responsibility when his train rolled out of a siding and collided with his engine while it was performing switching. The Board finds from the record that the Engineer took the entire blame for the accident. Further, Claimant was one and one-half (1-1/2) to two (2) miles away, providing flag protection at the time the engine was cut away from the cars and under the circumstances, Claimant's action as related to the accident is too remote to justify even a censure.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 110
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR (FW&D)
Award Date: 1983-04-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Yard Foreman for reinstatement to service with all rights unimpaired and pay for all time lost, plus pay for attending investigation. Claimant was dismissed for his responsibility in connection with a derailment when a cut of cars rolled out of a track and derailed due to insufficient hand brakes being set. Evidence establishes that Claimant properly instructed the field person to tie down the track, but due to her small size she was unable to set enough pressure on the brakes. While the Board acknowledges that Claimant has a poor past record, that alone does not establish his guilt in the instant case. There is no evidence produced by Carrier to show what else Claimant could have done to prevent this accident.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 117
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR (FW&D)
Award Date: 1983-04-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a ten (10) day suspension and pay for time lost, plus pay for attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in falling to comply with instructions and causing delay to another train. The Board finds no evidence that Claimant was aware of any instructions given by the Yardmaster and Carrier has failed to carry its burden of proof in this case.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 118
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR (FW&D)
Award Date: 1983-04-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a ten (10) day suspension and pay for time lost. This is a companion claim to the case decided in Award No. 117 of this Board, and the Claimant herein was the individual who received the message from the Yardmaster to wait in the yard until another train passed. Claimant's train, however, entered the main line, contrary to instructions, and caused delay to the other train leaving the yard. The Board finds sufficient evidence to conclude Claimant's guilt and the discipline assessed was neither excessive, arbitrary nor capricious.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2904-Award 1
Neutral: David P. Twomey
Parties: UTU-E vs. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Award Date: 1983-04-25 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rule in allowing his train to pass without stopping at a stop and proceed signal and failure to see that a switch was properly lined for movement. The Board notes that the fireman was operating the train on the date in question, but this does not relieve Claimant of his responsibilities. After review of all the facts, the Board finds that the discipline was neither arbitrary, capricious, nor excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 959-Award 137
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-T&C vs. Southern Railway Company
Award Date: 1983-04-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Conductor for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for violation of operating rules and failure to comply with a slow order. The record shows that when Claimant's train passed a station, Claimant failed to receive orders given by the agent, including the slow order. He was advised of the orders by his Engineer, but not in detail. Following investigation, Claimant was dismissed for violation of the slow order. The Board finds that Claimant should have been more insistent about knowing details of the order he missed. However, in view of his excellent past record, permanent dismissal is too severe and this claim is sustained accordingly.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 959-Award 141
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-T&C vs. Southern Railway Company
Award Date: 1983-04-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Conductor by reducing discipline of dismissal to a ninety (90) day suspension and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was dismissed for violation of operating rules in that an open junction switch was left unattended. The record shows that Claimant was in the depot conducting proper business and that he had instructed his crew to perform certain duties which included one of the crew members to be near the switch. The Board finds that permanent dismissal is too severe and ninety (90) days' suspension is the maximum which the record supports.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1312-Award 758
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU vs. Baltimore & Ohio RR Co.
Award Date: 1983-04-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant, while in the process of backing up to couple to his train after setting off and picking up, passed an absolute stop signal and struck or was struck by a car at a road crossing. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2999-Award 26
Neutral: David Dolnick
Parties: UTU-C&Y vs. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe - EL
Award Date: 1983-04-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of twenty (20) demerits from his personal record. Claimant was head brakeman on a train which developed a hot box. The fireman-in-training, who was operating the train, advised the engineer that a hot box indicator had been set off as the particular car crossed over it. Being impossible to set off the defective car at the location where the train was stopped, the crew proceeded to a location where it could be set out and did so. The Board finds that Claimant cannot be held responsible for not stopping the train immediately after the hot box was evident. The fireman, who had a greater responsibility in this situation than Claimant, was exonerated and Claimant deserved no greater discipline than the fireman.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 652
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-04-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Brakemen by reducing a thirty (30) day suspension to twenty (20) days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof, but allows the thirty (30) day suspension assessed the Conductor to stand. Claimants were disciplined for operating their train at a speed in excess of the authorized speed at a point where trackmen were working. The Board finds sufficient evidence in the record to support Carrier's conclusion, however, since the Conductor of the crew had a greater responsibility to insure compliance with the rule, the discipline of the Brakemen should not have been equal to that assessed the Conductor.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3195-Award 35
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-T vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1983-04-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Brakeman by reducing a fifteen (15) day actual suspension to a fifteen (15) day deferred suspension. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with placing a dangerous car improperly in the train consist. The Board finds from the evidence, that Claimant was disciplined to the same extent as the Conductor. However, since the Conductor has a greater degree of responsibility, it is improper to discipline Claimant to the same extent.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3195-Award 36
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-T vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1983-04-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a fifteen (15) day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with improper placement of a dangerous car in his train. This is a companion claim to that decided by Award No. 35 of this Board, and there is no justification to set the discipline aside.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3195-Award 38
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-T vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1983-04-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a ten (10) day deferred suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of the Hours of Service Act, in accepting a call to perform service without being properly rested. Further, he violated Carrier's rule by not notifying the Carrier that he did not have sufficient rest prior to going on duty. The Board finds that the evidence is clearly sufficient for Carrier to make a finding that the Claimant violated the rule.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2947-Award 5
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Award Date: 1983-04-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a fifteen (15) day deferred suspension, which activated a previous ten (10) day deferred suspension, and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in allowing his train to operate at speeds in excess of the maximum allowable. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support Carrier's conclusion and the discipline was not unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2947-Award 10
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Award Date: 1983-04-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failing to properly comply with a stop and proceed signal. The Board finds ample evidence to support Carrier's finding of guilt and the discipline assessed was not unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2947-Award 11
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Award Date: 1983-04-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor and Brakemen for removal of a seven (7) day deferred suspension and pay for any time lost. Claimants were disciplined for failure to fulfill the obligation of their assignment by taking an excessive coffee break. The Board holds that Carrier failed to establish Claimants' guilt by probative evidence and further, the notice of investigation was defective in that the language was too general.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2947-Award 14
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Award Date: 1983-04-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility when his engine went through a misaligned switch and passed a stop signal. The Board holds that while Claimant was not on the engine at the time of the incident, he still retains responsibility for the safety of the work under all circumstances. Under the circumstances, Claimant cannot be absolved of blame and the discipline was not unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2947-Award 18
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Award Date: 1983-04-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Trainman for removal of a fifteen (15) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for unauthorized use of a company vehicle, damage to property and delay to hump operations. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support Carrier's conclusion as to the rule violation and the discipline assessed was not unreasonable.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5440
Neutral: Gilbert H. Vernon
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1983-04-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service and pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for failure to be in his usual calling place to accept a call for service. The Board notes that Claimant has been previously reinstated by the Board and since that time his record has continued to be extremely poor. Under the circumstances, leniency should be at the sole discretion of the Carrier.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5441
Neutral: Gilbert H. Vernon
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1983-04-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed from service for failure to have current book of rules and time table and for quarrelsome and discourteous deportment and use of vulgar language toward a Trainmaster. The Board finds from the record that Claimant's conduct was not as serious as suggested by the Carrier. Even in view of Claimant's past record, permanent discharge is too severe.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2424-Award 45
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-04-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant was dismissed for his involvement in a counterfeit scheme, to which he plead guilty in a Federal District Court and was sentenced to a prison term. Organization contends that Claimant's employer was not named in the newspaper and there is no showing that any embarrassment was caused Carrier or that its public relations suffered. Further, Claimant was in furlough status at the time and the operating rules were not intended to apply to employees in that status. The Board finds that Claimant's misconduct reflected on his reliability and honesty, which are fundamental qualities to be expected in employees. Under the circumstances, Carrier's conclusion was not arbitrary or unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2424-Award 46
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-04-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service and pay for time lost. This is a companion claim to that which was decided by Award No. 45 of this Board, and it is disposed of in accordance with the findings contained.therein.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2424-Award 51
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-04-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for sleeping on duty and failing to properly perform his duties as a rear Brakeman. Carrier based its conclusion primarily on the basis of the Conductor's testimony. The Board finds evidence that a feud existed between the Conductor and Claimant at the time of the incident and the Conductor's testimony raises doubts that weaken the record. In view of the circumstances, permanent dismissal is too severe, however, in view of Claimant's past record, a lengthy suspension is warranted.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2201-Award 2
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago & Illinois Midland Railway Company
Award Date: 1983-03-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer and Fireman for removal of thirty (30) and fifteen (15) demerits respectively, and pay for all time lost. Claimants were disciplined for violation of operating rules when they failed to obtain block clearance after moving through the interlocking upon hand signals from the operator. The Board considers and rejects numerous procedural objections raised by the Organization, and finds sufficient evidence to support the conclusions reached by the Carrier. Organization's Dissent is attached.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2599-Award 56
Neutral: David P. Twomey
Parties: UTU vs. Illinois Central Gulf RR
Award Date: 1983-03-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Trainman for removal of a ten (10) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined, following investigation, for failure to call attention to either the Engineer or Conductor to apparent rule violations. Initially, the Board finds that the notice of investigation did not set forth the charge for which Claimant was disciplined. Further, the record of investigation does not contain any evidence that any of the crew members, including Claimant, were questioned concerning this failure. Therefore, the Board finds that Carrier did not meet its burden of proof as to the charges against Claimant and this claim must be sustained.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2599-Award 66
Neutral: David P. Twomey
Parties: UTU vs. Illinois Central Gulf RR
Award Date: 1983-03-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Trainman for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Following investigation, Claimant was dismissed for filing a false claim for U.S. Railroad Retirement Board Unemployment Compensation on three (3) dates, in violation of operating rule. Organization contends that Carrier has no right to police the Railroad Retirement System, the operating rule has no application in this case, and Carrier showed prejudgment by the wording of the notice of investigation. Based on the evidence of record, the Board rejects all three contentions of the Organization. The Board finds that the filing of false claims for Unemployment Compensation is an extremely serious matter and a violation of the operating rule. In view of the evidence, the discipline assessed was neither arbitrary, capricious nor excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2891-Award 12
Neutral: Joseph A. Sickles
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1983-03-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer and Fireman for removal of a ten (10) day deferred suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimants were disciplined for blocking a street crossing unnecessarily while setting off a car and switching a "dangerous car" to a safer place in the train. The Board finds that the ultimate responsibility in this situation was not that of the Claimants and accordingly, this claim is sustained.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3228-Award 5
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie RR Company - LE&E
Award Date: 1983-03-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of thirty (30) days' actual suspension and pay for all time lost. Following investigation, Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules when he failed to contact the Carrier regarding a particular move to be made, causing delay to his train and others, as a result thereof. The Board finds sufficient credible evidence contained in the record to support Carrier's conclusions and the discipline imposed is neither arbitrary, capricious nor excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1613-Award 383
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Southern Railway Co.
Award Date: 1983-02-28 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of an Engineer for pay for time lost in excess of seventy-five (75) days. Claimant was dismissed from service, and later reinstated by Carrier after being out of service five (5) months for violation of operating rules, resulting in a derailment. The Organization contends that the Carrier Officer was arbitrary in the handling of this individual member of the crew, as he alone was given actual suspension. Upon review of the record, the Board finds a degree of merit to the Organization's position and reduces the discipline accordingly.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1613-Award 392
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU vs. Cincinnati, New Orleans and Texas Pacific
Award Date: 1983-02-28 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for reinstatement to service and pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for violation of operating rules when his train exceeded the authorized speed and a knuckle was broken. The Board finds that Claimant had just been returned to service two (2) days prior to this incident after suspension for a similar incident and there is no support for returning him to service.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2105-Award 46
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Missouri Pacific RR Co.
Award Date: 1983-02-25 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Fireman for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to properly observe a signal indication which resulted in running a stop signal and going past a switch that would have put the train onto a side track. The Board finds that the signal in question, at certain times, could not reasonably be read correctly and the Engineer and Fireman both were doing their best to read the signal. As to the switch, the Board finds that the Conductor knew what was going on and he did nothing. He was not disciplined for the offense and the Board finds that Claimant should not suffer a loss when others of equal or greater responsibility had none.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2995-Award 27
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk and Western Railway Co. - Lake Region
Award Date: 1983-02-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a thirty (30) day actual suspension from his service record. Claimant was charged with responsibility in failure to comply with a train order restricting the speed of his train to 10 M.P.H. at a location where a section gang was working. According to the train's Engineer, the speed at the time of incident was 50 M.P.H. Claimant contends that he was answering questions of a new brakeman making his first trip and when he realized that he was in the vicinity of the slow order, he immediately called the speed to the attention of the Engineer. The Board finds that the Carrier did not act in an arbitrary manner in finding Claimant's failure to take timely action to assure compliance with the train order to be sufficient cause for disciplinary action.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2443-Award 29
Neutral: Leverett Edwards
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Missouri Pacific Railroad - (T&P)
Award Date: 1983-02-16 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failing to properly perform his duties resulting in excessive delay to the train. The Board finds from review of the entire record that Claimant did not receive a fair and impartial investigation and the Carrier failed to take into account malfunctioning equipment, such as a faulty braking appliance and inoperative radio, among other things.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2709-Award 102
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-T vs. Houston Belt & Terminal Rwy. Company
Award Date: 1983-02-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yardman for removal of a thirty (30) day deferred suspension. Claimant was disciplined for not exercising reasonable care, resulting in the loss or theft of a portable radio. Organization raises a procedural contention that other crew members should have been called as witnesses at the investigation. The Board finds that the procedural requirements were met by the Carrier and that Claimant failed to use at least ordinary care in protecting that which was entrusted to him.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2333-Award 14
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. - Former NKP-WLE
Award Date: 1983-02-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a ten (10) day deferred suspension, which activated a ten (10) day deferred suspension, resulting in his serving a ten (10) day suspension. Following investigation, Claimant was disciplined for failure to be in a position to observe whether a switch was properly lined for movement, which resulted in derailment of one (1) car and damage to others. The Board finds that Claimant was accorded due process and the facts developed at the investigation clearly establish Claimant's culpability.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 107
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Fort Worth & Denver Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1983-02-01 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of censure and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant herein was a Brakeman of the train crew involved in Award No. 105 of this Board and this claim is denied in accordance with the findings contained therein.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3029-Award 1
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Union Pacific RR Co.
Award Date: 1983-01-31 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Engineer for pay for time lost in excess of three (3) months. Claimant was dismissed from service following investigation for his responsibility in connection with passing an absolute stop signal in violation of operating rule. Claimant was subsequently returned to service after approximately one (1) year without prejudice to his claim for time lost. The Board finds that Claimant might have been more responsive and alert to have stopped his train short of the signal even with the alleged faulty equipment and in view of the circumstances, discipline in excess of three (3) months is excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 7
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific Trans. Co. - T&L Lines
Award Date: 1983-01-24 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a fifteen (15) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules in that he failed to give signals to the engineer resulting in passing an interlocking signal displaying a stop indication. The Board, upon review of all the facts and testimony of record, finds that Carrier did not meet its burden of proof in support of its charges against Claimant.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2527-Award 51
Neutral: Arthur W. Sempliner
Parties: UTU vs. Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac RR Co.
Award Date: 1983-01-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Flagman for removal of a seven (7) day suspension and pay for all time lost, including monetary equivalent of productivity shares lost. Claimant received discipline, following investigation, for his responsibility in allowing his train to operate at an excessive speed. The Board finds that Claimant was the only crew member who took exception to the excessive speed and, it appears to the Board, that the discipline assessed was excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2527-Award 52
Neutral: Arthur W. Sempliner
Parties: UTU vs. Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac RR Co.
Award Date: 1983-01-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a seven (7) day suspension and pay for time lost. This is a companion case to that decided by Award No. 51 of this Board, and Claimant was Head Brakeman of the train which was operated at an excessive speed. The Board finds that Claimant was in a position to be aware of the excessive speed and took no action to see that the Engineer complied with the maximum speed authorized.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2236-Award 16
Neutral: Nicholas H. Zumas
Parties: UTU vs. Western Maryland Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-01-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Flagman for removal of ten (10) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with a derailment, failing to inspect the train for damage and/or derailment after an emergency application of the brakes and failure to observe track damage subsequent to the emergency brake application and prior to the derailment of additional cars. The Board finds that Claimant was in violation of the cited rules. However, the other crew members were equally in violation of the rules and Claimant was the only individual disciplined. The Board holds that Carrier is not entitled to single out one employee for discipline and to relieve the remainder of the crew who were also responsible.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3195-Award 11
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-T vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1983-01-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for transmitting unnecessary and irrelevant information over the radio in violation of Carrier's Operating Rules. After careful consideration of the entire record, the Board finds that the discipline assessed was neither harsh, arbitrary nor unjust.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3195-Award 14
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-T vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1983-01-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of two (2) Brakemen for removal of a sixty (60) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimants were disciplined for their responsibility in connection with passing a stop and stay signal. All five (5) crew members testified at the investigation that the signal immediately prior to the signal in question displayed a clear aspect and there has been a history of signal malfunction in the territory here involved. Carrier produces evidence that the signals were tested immediately after this incident and they were found to be in proper working order. After thorough review of all the evidence and precedent awards cited by the parties, the Board finds that Carrier produced sufficient evidence as to the proper working of the signals and there is no justification to set aside the discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3195-Award 15
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-T vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1983-01-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a ten (10) day deferred suspension and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failing to promptly report an accident between his train and a passenger automobile. The record shows that Claimant attempted to contact the Trainmaster several times via radio and again by telephone after registering off duty, without success. The damage to the car was minimal and Claimant had the driver's name and telephone number. The Board holds that Claimant did not violate the rules by reporting the accident the next day, particularly when it is clear he made a reasonable effort to contact the Trainmaster and was unable to do so.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3195-Award 16
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-T vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1983-01-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a fifteen (15) day deferred suspension and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was charged with violation of an operating rule which resulted in a derailment and damage to equipment. The record shows that Claimant assumed a switch was properly lined for the movement of cars into a clear track and he did not inspect the switch to insure its proper alignment. As a result, a crew shoved cars into the wrong track and a derailment ensued. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support the rule violation and this claim must be denied.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3195-Award 18
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-T vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1983-01-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a thirty (30) day deferred suspension and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with his train being operated in excess of the maximum allowable speed. Organization raises several procedural objections regarding the propriety of the investigation, but the Board rejects these contentions and holds that Claimant was given a full, fair and complete investigation. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support Carrier's finding of Claimant's guilt and there is no basis to set aside the discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3023-Award 1
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU vs. Sacramento Northern Railway
Award Date: 1983-01-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a forty (40) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was removed from service pending investigation when the Conductor of Claimant's assignment informed Carrier officials of his refusal to continue working with Claimant because of his unsafe work practices. A subsequent verbal confrontation ensued between Conductor and Claimant and it became necessary for Carrier officials to be summoned to the scene. Thereafter, Claimant was removed from service. The Board rejects procedural objections and contention of prejudgment raised by the Organization and finds from the weight of Claimant's own testimony that the discipline was warranted.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 644
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-01-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Yardman for removal of a ten (10) day actual suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules for failure to observe the position of derail switch points and running through same, causing damage thereto. The Board finds that the only evidence that Claimant was at fault is circumstantial and that too many questions regarding the incident are left unresolved. Under these circumstances, the evidence is insufficient for Carrier to find Claimant guilty of rule violation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 648
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1983-01-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Rear Brakeman for removal of thirty (30) day actual suspension and thirty (30) day deferred suspension, respectively. Claimants were disciplined for their responsibility in allowing their train to operate at a speed in excess of the speed restriction. The Board notes the argument advanced by the Organization, but finds that Claimants had the responsibility of contacting the Engineer to advise him of the excessive speed. Instead, they did nothing. In view of these facts, the discipline imposed was neither harsh, arbitrary or unjust.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3258-Award 1
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-E vs. Union Pacific
Award Date: 1983-01-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Fireman for reinstatement to service with seniority unimpaired and pay for all time lost, less deduction of outside earnings. Claimant was dismissed following investigation for failure to properly report an off-duty injury. The Board finds from the record that Claimant did, in fact, fail to properly report the injury. However, this claim is sustained on the basis of a time limit violation on the part of the Carrier when it failed to respond to the Organization's appeal of discharge within sixty (60) days as required by the applicable rule. The Board sets forth the manner in which pay for time lost is to be computed and retains jurisdiction in the event the parties fail to agree on the amount payable.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 100-Award 426
Neutral: Jack A. Warshaw
Parties: UTU vs. St. Louis and Southwestern
Award Date: 1982-12-31 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of 30 demerits from his personal record and pay for time lost, if any, for attending the investigation. Claimant was disciplined following an investigation for reading a newspaper in the caboose while on duty. Organization contends that the newspaper was spread out on the Conductor's desk to serve as a tablecloth in protecting the Conductor's reports and other Carrier records while Claimant was eating and Carrier has not proven its case. After a thorough review of the testimony of record, the Board finds that Claimant's refusal to enter a denial to the charge must be taken as an admission in light of the circumstances and his presumed knowledge of the Carrier rules regarding the offense.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 100-Award 428
Neutral: Jack A. Warshaw
Parties: UTU vs. St. Louis and Southwestern
Award Date: 1982-12-31 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for pay for all time lost plus pay for attending investigation, as a result of being dismissed from service and subsequently reinstated. Claimant was charged with and found guilty of robbery of a grocery store on August 25, 1980, and sentenced to 2212 years in the Arkansas Department of Corrections. By letter dated May 14, 1981, Claimant was instructed to report for duty no later than 5:00 p.m., May 17, 1981, however, due to his incarceration he was unable to mark up until 7:10 p.m., May 18, 1981. Following an investigation he was dismissed on May 28, 1981, for violation of operating rules and failure to mark-up as instructed. Subsequently, the Arkansas Supreme Court dismissed Claimant's conviction of robbery on May 3, 1982, and Claimant was restored to service May 28, 1982. The claim here is for pay for time lost between May 18, 1981 and May 28, 1982. The Board finds that Carrier's dismissal of Claimant was neither arbitrary nor capricious. Based upon the information then available to it following investigation on the property, the Carrier had no reason to assume that the Claimant's conviction by a court of competent jurisdiction had erred in its findings. The offense for which the Claimant had been found guilty was a serious criminal act and was clearly one that was included within the list of prohibitions contained in Rule N of the Uniform Code of Operating Rules.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 100-Award 430
Neutral: Jack A. Warshaw
Parties: UTU vs. St. Louis and Southwestern
Award Date: 1982-12-31 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service with seniority and other rights unimpaired, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed from service, following an investigation, for violation of operating rule when he pled guilty to a misdemeanor in Circuit Court on the charge of possession of marijuana. Carrier contends that this subjected it to criticism and loss of good will and the discipline was fully warranted. In drawing a distinction between the mere possession of marijuana, a soft drug, and the more serious offense involving use or possession of hard drugs or distribution of either soft or hard drugs, the Board finds permanent dismissal to be excessive. There was no contention by the Carrier that Claimant was in violation of the more serious offense or of Carrier rules prohibiting the use or possession of drugs while on duty or on company property.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2888-Award 17
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Award Date: 1982-12-24 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Trainman for reinstatement to service with seniority and other rights unimpaired, but without pay for time lost. Following an investigation held in absentia, Claimant was disciplined for rule violations in that he removed a blue flag from a track without proper authority. Organization contends that Claimant did not receive the letter advising him of the investigation until the date the investigation was held, thereby causing his absence. Carrier contends that the reason Claimant did not receive the letter was due to his own action. The Board finds that although Claimant's prior record leaves much to be desired, permanent separation from service at this time is unwarranted.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2946-Award 26
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific Trans. Co. - T&L Lines
Award Date: 1982-12-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Conductor for reinstatement to service with seniority unimpaired, but without pay for time lost. Following investigation, Claimant was dismissed from service for failure to provide proper flag protection to the rear of his train, in violation of the operating rule. Organization contends that the investigation was improper because Carrier failed to call an eye witness to the alleged infraction whose testimony was essential to the proceeding. The Board finds merit to this contention, however, it notes from the transcript that Claimant's own testimony supports the fact that proper flag protection was not carried out. In view of the admission of rule violation by Claimant, and the investigation error by Carrier, the Board finds that Claimant will be restored to service, but without pay for time lost.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3150-Award 19
Neutral: Jack W. Cassle
Parties: UTU-E vs. Southern Pacific Trans. Co. - Eastern Lines
Award Date: 1982-12-22 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for reinstatement to service with seniority and other rights unimpaired and pay for all time lost. Claimant was dismissed from service following investigation, for his responsibility in connection with a derailment caused by two (2) hot boxes and journal failure. The Board finds no evidence of ignorance, intentional neglect or actions of an impetuous character on the part of the Claimant, and discipline is set aside.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3077-Award 1
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: BLE vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-12-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension, pay for all time lost, pay for attending the investigation, and loss of any and all fringe benefits. Claimant was disciplined for failing to comply with operating rules. The Board finds that the Carrier failed to carry its burden of proof as to the rule violation and this fact is evidenced by testimony contained in the investigation transcript.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3077-Award 3
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: BLE vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-12-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of a ninety (90) day suspension. Claimant was charged with violation of operating rules relating to the safe operation of trains. The Board finds that Claimant was guilty of extremely poor judgment and negligence in failing to seek a clarification of a garbled train order relayed to him by the Conductor which could have resulted in a collision.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3077-Award 4
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: BLE vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-12-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Hostler Helper for removal of a twenty (20) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failing to comply with a Supervisor's instructions and leaving the property prior to completion of assignment. Initially, the Board finds that there is a practice on this property that allows early quits without express authority from a company official. Further, the responsibility for failing to comply with the issued instructions lies with the Hostler, as the instructions were issued to him and he failed to comply therewith.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3077-Award 11
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: BLE vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-12-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of twenty (20) demerits from this personal record and pay for time lost attending the investigation. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules relating to reporting for duty and examining bulletins prior to commencing service. The Board finds that the record will not support the discipline imposed as the Carrier failed to show a violation on either of the cited rules.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3077-Award 16
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: BLE vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-12-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of a ten (10) day suspension and pay for all time lost, including pay for attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for leaving company property before the completion of his assignment and filing a false time return. The Board finds that the Conductor of the crew, acting as Footboard Yardmaster, authorized the early quit and this was permissible under the rules. Further, since Claimant was guaranteed eight (8) hours' pay as a minimum, there was nothing wrong with marking off duty at the regular off duty time. The Board notes that this practice has been changed by bulletin, but only after the alleged violation under examination.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 910-Award 3
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Conrail
Award Date: 1982-12-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Trainman for reinstatement with all rights unimpaired and pay for all time lost. Claimant was dismissed following investigation for failure to promptly report a personal injury and making false statements regarding the injury. Carrier's determination that Claimant made false statements regarding the manner in which the injury was sustained is based solely upon a newspaper article and written testimony of a police officer. The Board holds that this is insufficient proof that the statement made by Claimant is false. However, the Board finds that Claimant clearly failed to promptly report the injury to proper Carrier officials and in view of Claimant's past record, the discipline of dismissal is neither harsh, arbitrary nor excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3150-Award 17
Neutral: Jack W. Cassle
Parties: UTU-E vs. Southern Pacific Trans. Co. - Eastern Lines
Award Date: 1982-12-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of an Engineer for reinstatement with seniority and other rights unimpaired, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed following investigation for operating her train in excess of the allowable speed. The Board finds ample evidence in the record, including Claimant's own testimony, but orders reinstatement with the warning that, in the future she must exercise due care as an operating engineer.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2759-Award 24
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-12-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yard Foreman for removal of a fifteen (15) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with a derailment caused by shoving too many cars into a track which in turn caused cars to roll out and collide with cars on another track. Procedural objections raised by the Organization are rejected by the Board. The Board finds that the Claimant was guilty of violation of the operating rules as charged, and that he failed to use due care in the performance of his duties.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 633
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-12-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer and Fireman for removal of fifteen (15) day and ten (10) day deferred suspension respectively. Claimants were disciplined for violation of operating rules when they were observed by a Carrier Patrolman standing at a home signal at the entrance of a yard for approximately one (1) hour. Evidence establishes that the signal displayed a stop indication, Claimants attempted to contact the Yardmaster, but were unable to do so, and that Claimants followed the normal procedure. The Board finds no violation of the rules cited by the Carrier and under the circumstances, the discipline must be set aside.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 960-Award 108
Neutral: Arthur W. Sempliner
Parties: BLE vs. Boston and Maine Corporation
Award Date: 1982-11-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of forty-eight (48) demerits and fifteen (15) day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules when his train allegedly passed a red stop signal. Both the Claimant and the Conductor testified that the signal was green. Based upon the testimony of record, the Board finds the testimony to be insufficient to support the charge.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 960-Award 109
Neutral: Arthur W. Sempliner
Parties: BLE vs. Boston and Maine Corporation
Award Date: 1982-11-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for pay for time lost as a result of being "barred from operating through freight trains as set forth in letter attached." The restriction was subsequently removed. The Board finds that this case should have never been brought before this Board had it been given proper review on the property. Claimant was disciplined for improper handling of his train based on judgement calls by a new Trainmaster who may have been a little trigger happy in the application of discipline. On this basis, and the failure to cite specific wrongdoing in the charge, this claim must be sustained.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 960-Award 110
Neutral: Arthur W. Sempliner
Parties: BLE vs. Boston and Maine Corporation
Award Date: 1982-11-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for pay for all time lost as a result of a twenty (20) day suspension and restriction to yard service. Claimant was disciplined for causing a delay to an Amtrak train. The Board finds the charge against Claimant to be minimal and the discipline excessive. Further, this claim must be sustained as Claimant was removed from service prior to the investigation, thus being denied a fair and impartial investigation under the rule.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5351
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1982-11-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service and pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed for violation of Operating Rules when he pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance which resulted in a six (6) month jail sentence and a five (5) year probation period. The Board, after careful and in-depth consideration of all facts, finds that it must uphold the decision of the Carrier.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5352
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1982-11-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant was reinstated by a previous award of this Board, and in accordance with the rules on the property, was advised of the requirement to successfully pass the required physical and other examinations within 30 days of the carrier's letter of reinstatement. Claimant advised Carrier that he was not in a position to pass the required rules examination prior to the expiration of 30 days and requested an extension of time. His request was denied and following investigation he was terminated from service. The Board finds that Claimant was not treated any differently than any other employee in the same circumstances and Claimant failed to furnish facts sufficient to justify a further delay beyond the 30 days.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5354
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1982-11-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost. Claimant was charged with being in unauthorized possession of a Carrier breathing apparatus. On May 26, 1979, the breathing apparatus was found to be missing from the West End of Tunnel No. 6, MP 238.9. Some three (3) years later, during a search by police officers of Claimant's residence involving an unrelated matter, said breathing apparatus was discovered and turned over to the Carrier. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support Carrier's conclusion that Claimant had unauthorized possession of the breathing apparatus and Claimant admitted that he worked in the area of Tunnel No. 6 during the period that said apparatus was located there.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5355
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1982-11-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Brakeman by conditionally reinstating Claimant to service with all rights unimpaired, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed from service for violation of operating rules when he left the property, which necessitated another employee be called in his place, and remained unavailable for work without proper permission. The Board reinstates Claimant subject to his remaining in a probationary status for a period of one (1) year. Further, he and his local representative will meet with Carrier to review Claimant's service record, be sure he thoroughly understands the meaning and application of the rule involved herein, and that he understands the condition of this reinstatement. If Claimant does not agree to accepting these conditions, his claim will be denied as of that time.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5356
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1982-11-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of discipline and pay for all time lost while withheld from service. Claimant was charged with violation of operating rules and accident responsibility when he failed to stop his train for inspection after being advised by a Section Foreman that a car of his train was observed to have wheels sliding. As a result of an investigation, Claimant was dismissed from service, but shortly thereafter was returned to service without prejudice to the claim for time lost. The Board finds that Claimant failed to properly comply with the rules and the derailment and damage, in all probability, would not have occurred if the rules had been complied with by Claimant.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5357
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific
Award Date: 1982-11-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Conductor for reinstatement to service with all rights unimpaired, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed following investigation for violation of operating rules. Because of Claimant's abnormal and irrational behavior during his tour of duty, all of Claimant's crew members filed complaints to the Trainmaster alleging such misconduct to be unsafe, irrational, boisterous, harassing and threatening. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support Carrier's findings as to Claimant's culpability. However, the Board notes Carrier's previous offers of leniency reinstatement and again offers such reinstatement to Claimant subject to the four (4) conditions outlined in the Superintendent's letter. Should Claimant fail to advise Carrier within 30 days after receipt of notification of reinstatement that he is agreeable to those conditions, his claim will be considered denied as of that date.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 298
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-10-06 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yard Conductor for removal of a thirty (30) day actual suspension. Claimant was disciplined for failure to progress in an orderly manner, the work assigned as required by the rule when a Switchman of his crew was observed sleeping on duty. The Board finds support for the finding of Claimant's culpability and he was accorded a fair and impartial investigation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 104
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Fort Worth & Denver Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1982-10-01 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Foreman for removal of censure from his personal record and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failure to properly instruct his crew in the safe movement of their train, which resulted in a crossing accident with a tractor-trailer. The Board finds that the fact that the accident occurred is sufficient evidence to support Claimant's rule violation. Had instructions been given by Claimant to provide flagging at the intersection, this accident would not have happened.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1900-Award 52
Neutral: Leverett Edwards
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Missouri Pacific RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-08-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a thirty (30) day actual suspension. Claimant was charged with responsibility in connection with a journal failure on the fifteenth (15th) car from the engine. Upon review of the entire record, the Board finds that Carrier failed to show negligence on the part of any crew member and the discipline imposed cannot be supported by the record.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 236
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-08-06 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Trainman for removal of fifteen (15) demerits from his service record and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was cited for investigation for failure to promptly call for his mail after being notified that it was available, in violation of the rule. The Board finds that the letter was allegedly read to Claimant on the telephone, thus eliminating the need to pick it up, and the discipline cannot be supported.
View Award

First Division, N.R.A.B. -Award 23336
Neutral: Rodney E. Dennis
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake and Ohio
Award Date: 1982-07-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for pay for time lost as a result of a 10-day suspension. Claimant was charged with an operating rule violation when 63 cars left on a siding rolled out and collided with Claimant's yard assignment. The Board finds from the evidence of record that Claimant instructed another crew member to secure the cars and he failed to do so. Therefore, Carrier acted in an arbitrary manner in assessing Claimant a penalty for a rule violation for which he was not guilty.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2721
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago & North Western Trans. Co.
Award Date: 1982-07-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a five (5) day deferred suspension, which was subsequently served as a result of another incident, and that he be paid for all time lost as well as time spent at the investigation. Claimant was assessed discipline for noncompliance with a restricted speed train order. The Board finds in favor of Organization's contention that Claimant was denied a fair investigation when the individual who actually handled the radar gun, used to determine the train speed, was not present at the investigation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 159
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-06-21 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Fireman for removal of twenty (20) demerits from his service record. Claimant was discipline for violation of operating rules for being out of place and unavailable for call. The Board finds that Claimant was regularly assigned and reported for duty without call. On the dates in question, Claimant was on rest days of his assignment and was not properly subject to call. The discipline cannot be supported by the rules.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 235
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-06-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Trainman for removal of thirty (30) day actual suspension from his personal record and pay for all time lost in accordance with the findings contained in Award No. 233 of this Board.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2759-Award 28
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-06-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a sixty (60) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was Head Brakeman of a train which derailed thirty-eight (38) cars and caboose, as a result of operating down a grade at excessive speed. The Board finds that Claimant was guilty of operating rule violation when he noticed that the train was proceeding at an excessive speed, but failed to take any action which would have prevented the derailment.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2955-Award 10
Neutral: Dana E. Eischen
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of letter of censure from his personal record and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with a derailment of a car in his train and subsequent sideswipe of a passing train. The Board finds from a review of all the evidence that Claimant was guilty of violation of the rules as charged and there is no reason to set aside the discipline assessed.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2955-Award 11
Neutral: Dana E. Eischen
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Brakeman by reducing a thirty (30)day suspension to fifteen (15) days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules in allowing his train to pass two (2) signals displaying stop indications. Upon review of the evidence of record, the Board finds that conditions at the first signal could have caused it to be misread and both Claimant and Fireman called the signal "yellow" to the engineer. As to the second signal, there is no doubt that a red aspect was passed. Since discipline was imposed for passing two (2) red signal aspects, the Board holds that, in view of the evidence, it should be reduced to fifteen (15) days.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2955-Award 12
Neutral: Dana E. Eischen
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Yardman by reducing a ten (10) day suspension to five (5) days and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules resulting in a collision when a car of his train went through a switch and ran into another train causing derailment. The Board finds no indication that claimant was guilty of violating two (2) of the rules with which he was cited. However, he was guilty of failing to give specific instructions to his engineer concerning the move they were making. In view of the foregoing, the Board holds that a ten (10) day suspension is excessive and reduces the discipline accordingly.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2955-Award 13
Neutral: Dana E. Eischen
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for operating his passenger train in excess of the maximum allowable speed. Organization raises procedural objections as well as assertions that Carrier failed in its burden of proof, however, these objections are rejected by the Board. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support Carrier's conclusion and the discipline assessed was not excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 868-Award 202
Neutral: Paul N. Guthrie
Parties: UTU vs. Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakeman for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension, but sustains claim of the other Brakeman for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension and pay for time lost. Claimants were crew members who were cited for investigation for failure to properly carry out their responsibilities. The Board finds that the Conductor and Brakeman were properly disciplined, but Carrier did not prove that the other Brakeman was not in a position to inspect a passing train.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2765-Award 15
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a ten (10) day deferred suspension. Claimant was charged with "use of company equipment and time to make unauthorized tests of signals and other related appliances...". The Board finds that the Carrier has not met its burden of proof in establishing that Claimant had participated in the activities for which he was charged.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2765-Award 16
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a five (5) day deferred suspension. Claimant was charged with violation of safety rules, as to the proper manner in which employees will position themselves on cars. The Board finds that the rule, as written, gives employees some discretion, and Claimant has demonstrated good and sufficient reason for not considering it practical to position himself on the car in the manner suggested by the rule.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2765-Award 17
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of a five (5) day deferred suspension. Claimant was directing a switching movement while standing on a snow covered metal auger cover. As the car went by, it apparently put pressure on a portion of the auger cover creating a catapult effect which threw Claimant into the side of a car. Claimant contends that it has been a necessary practice for one to stand on the cover to spot and line cars at this location and the Carrier has not successfully refuted such contention. Under the circumstances, the Board finds no support for the discipline imposed.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2891-Award 3
Neutral: Joseph A. Sickles
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-11 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of a ten (10) day deferred suspension. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules in that he allowed a public crossing to be blocked longer than was necessary. Organization points out that Claimant was working under the supervision of his Conductor and he had no knowledge of the crossing being blocked. The Board finds that the evidence, taken as a whole, does not demonstrate that Claimant was responsible for the blockage of the crossing.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2891-Award 4
Neutral: Joseph A. Sickles
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-11 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of a ten (10) day actual suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was charged with violation of operating rules when the rear of a cut of cars he was placing in a siding passed a stop and stay signal, causing damage to a power switch. The Board finds that the movement was under the direction of the Conductor and the evidence does not support a finding of negligence on the part of the Claimant.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2891-Award 1
Neutral: Joseph A. Sickles
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-11 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of a fifteen (15) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was charged with violation of operating rules governing the safe movement of trains which resulted in a collision and significant damage. The Board finds that Claimant was operating in main line service in an area known to the Carrier to have problems with vandalism. On the date in question, a switch had been tampered with, which resulted in Claimant's train being switched from the main line into a siding, which resulted in the collision. The Board finds it unreasonable for an employee to stop and inspect each switch when operating on the main line and the circumstances of this case do not warrant discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2858-Award 6
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Southern Pacific Trans. Co. - T&L Lines
Award Date: 1982-05-11 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of sixty (60) demerits from his personal record and pay for all time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules for failure to detect that a car had derailed, causing extensive track damage for approximately 31 miles. The Board finds insufficient evidence to support the findings of the Carrier. Claimant was not riding in the caboose, but was using his personal automobile, and such practice is both permitted and condoned by the Carrier.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 599
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-05-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a five (5) day deferred suspension, pay for time lost attending the investigation and pay for time lost for a twenty (20) day actual suspension activated because of this incident. Claimant was disciplined for violation of safety rules when he was observed by company officials to have placed his hand on the spokes of a brake wheel. In view of the fact that Claimant has thirty (30) years of service and no record of safety rule violations, and under all the circumstances, it is the opinion of the Board that Claimant should not have been disciplined, but instead Carrier should have issued a letter to Claimant cautioning him to observe the safety rules.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2900-Award 14
Neutral: Irving T. Bergman
Parties: UTU vs. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Rwy. Co. (CL)
Award Date: 1982-04-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of Yardman for reinstatement to service with seniority unimpaired, but without pay for time lost. Claimant was dismissed from service following investigation for being accident prone. Several procedural objections are raised by the Organization, however, they are rejected by the Board and Claimant was given a timely and fair investigation. Following a review of all facts and evidence of record, the Board finds that while Claimant has been involved in many accidents resulting in personal injury, and he did meet several definitions of "accident prone", the Carrier failed to establish that Claimant was uncoordinated in his movements, delayed reactions to circumstances or a dull imperceptive inability to recognize unsafe conditions.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2840-Award 9
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU vs. Georgia Railroad
Award Date: 1982-04-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claims of three (3) employees for removal of thirty (30) day suspension and another employee for removal of a five (5) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimants were crew members of two (2) different trains which were involved in a near collision and disciplined for rule violations after investigation. Upon review of all evidence of record, the Board finds that the Carrier has failed to carry its burden of proof as to the rule violations of the Claimants.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2806-Award 29
Neutral: Herbert L. Marx, Jr.
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern, Inc.
Award Date: 1982-04-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Car Retarder Operator for removal of a five (5) day suspension and pay for all time lost, including time spent attending the investigation. Claimant was working with a Student Retarder Operator in his third day of training, when Claimant absented himself from the control tower for no apparent reason. During the period of absence, the Student lined a wrong switch, which resulted in a collision between a car and a two engine train. The Board finds Claimant in violation of the cited rule and there is no reason to find fault with the action taken by the Carrier.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2806-Award 30
Neutral: Herbert L. Marx, Jr.
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern, Inc.
Award Date: 1982-04-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Student Retarder Operator for removal of a five (5) day suspension and pay for all time lost. This is a companion case to that decided in Award No. 29 of this Board. Here, the Board finds that Claimant, in his third day of training, was not sufficiently experienced to operate on his own and, absent a showing that he deliberately failed in his task, this claim is sustained.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 276
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-04-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Fireman for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension and pay for all time lost, including pay for attending the investigation. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules regarding the safe movement of engines, which resulted in a hard coupling and damage to the engines. The Board finds that damage to the engines demonstrates conclusively that Claimant was in violation of the cited rules and that the discipline was not excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 291
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-04-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Engineer by reducing a thirty (30) day actual suspension to twenty (20) demerits and allowing pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for violation of various operating rules pertaining to safe operation of a train and not acknowledging a stop signal with the engine horn. Of all the rules with which Claimant was charged, the Board finds that Claimant only violated the one relating to sounding the engine horn and discipline is reduced accordingly.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2907-Award 4
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Denver & Rio Grande Western
Award Date: 1982-03-31 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of an Engineer by reducing what amounted to an eighty-eight (88) day suspension to a sixty (60) day suspension and allows pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was dismissed from service for passing a red signal indication and subsequently reinstated after eighty-eight (88) days. The Board holds that Claimant might have taken more precaution in the operation of his train, but under all the circumstances, finds that a sixty (60) day suspension would have been in keeping with the accepted practice in the industry.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2907-Award 5
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Denver & Rio Grande Western
Award Date: 1982-03-31 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of a Fireman by reducing discipline of forty (40) demerits to ten (10) demerits and allows pay for the eight (8) days Claimant was withheld from service pending investigation. Claimant was on the head end of a train that ran through a yellow signal indication which turned red while the train was in emergency. The Board finds that perhaps Claimant could have called the signal indication to the attention of the Engineer a little earlier, however, Carrier should not have held him out of service pending investigation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3012-Award 4
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU-S vs. Southern Pacific Trans. Co. - T&L Lines
Award Date: 1982-03-29 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Switchman for pay for time lost for what amounted to a thirty-five (35) day suspension. Claimant was dismissed from service for failure to take immediate action to insure safe stopping of his train at a crossing. He was later reinstated without prejudice to this claim. The Board finds that Claimant admitted his guilt of the rule violation at the investigation and, under all the circumstances, a thirty-five (35) day suspension is not excessive discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3012-Award 6
Neutral: David Dolnick
Parties: UTU-S vs. Southern Pacific Trans. Co. - T&L Lines
Award Date: 1982-03-29 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Switchman for removal of a twelve (12) day suspension from his record and pay for all time lost including the cost of a blood test. Claimant was a member of the crew involved in Award No. 5 of this board, and was withheld from service pending investigation for violation of Rule "G" and possible withholding of information for not reporting Rule "G" violation. The record fails to show Claimant had knowledge that other members of his crew drank beer while on duty, and Carrier was wrong to presume he had such knowledge.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2010-Award 25
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU-S vs. Missouri Pacific RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-03-25 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claims of Switchmen for removal of discipline and pay for all time lost including time lost while attending investigation, but denies claim of Yard Foreman. Following investigation, Claimant crew was found to have violated operating rules which resulted in derailment and track damage. Upon review of the entire transcript, the Board finds that the Yard Foreman must bear the responsibility to insure the safe movement of the train and this responsibility has not been met. Further, the case against the two Switchmen was rather sketchily done and too much taken for granted for the discipline to be upheld.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2488-Award 15
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-03-25 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yard Conductor for removal of thirty (30) day actual suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was charged with and found responsible for the loss of a portable radio unit charged to his care. Organization contends that the discipline was unwarranted and excessive, arguing that the radio was stolen from the engine while the crew was at lunch and not lost by Claimant. Upon review of the transcript, the Board finds no mitigating circumstances to warrant disruption of discipline and discipline was not arbitrary, capricious or excessive.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 18-Award 5323
Neutral: Paul D. Hanlon
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Pacific Trans. Co. - WL
Award Date: 1982-03-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor for removal of thirty (30) demerits and pay for time lost attending the investigation. Claimant was charged with violation of operating rule requiring immediate inspection of as much of a train as possible. The Board finds a serious conflict in the testimony as to the distance from which Carrier Officers observed the alleged violation. This conflict could have been cleared up by testimony of the Engineer as to exactly where he stopped the train. The refusal of the Hearing Officer to call the Engineer as a witness was an error which resulted in unfairness to the Claimant, and the claim is sustained on that basis.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2801-Award 7
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU-C,T&Y vs. Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe - CL
Award Date: 1982-03-16 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engine Foreman for removal of approximately a four and one-half month suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was originally dismissed, but reinstated with full seniority and without prejudice to claim for time lost. Claimant was charged with failure to insure the safe movement of his train which resulted in a collision with a foreign Carrier's track machine. Organization's contention that the record is replete with procedural defects is rejected by the Board. The Board finds that Claimant was guilty of the rules as charged and in view of the seriousness of the accident, the discipline imposed was not arbitrary, capricious or unfair.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1981-Award 447
Neutral: Nicholas H. Zumas
Parties: BLE vs. Southern Pacific Trans. Co.
Award Date: 1982-03-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension and pay for all time lost, including pay for attending the investigation. Claimant was disciplined for passing a red conditional stop sign without proper authorization. The Board finds that the Carrier failed in its burden of proof that Claimant intentionally entered the work limits without authorization. There is ample evidence to conclude that Claimant believed that he had authorization from the Production Supervisor to pass the red conditional stop sign.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 3048-Award 1
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-E vs. Union Pacific RR Company Eastern District
Award Date: 1982-03-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Fireman for removal of thirty (30) demerits from his personal record. Claimant was disciplined for operating rule violation relating to reading newspapers and magazines while on duty. In view of all the evidence of record, the Board finds that Carrier did not carry its burden of proof within the meaning of the rule cited.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 251
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-03-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Switchman for removal of a five (5) day deferred suspension and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with a derailment and equipment damage as a result of a blind shove. The Board takes Claimant to task for permitting the blind shove to be made and in view of the circumstances, finds the Carrier extremely lenient in its discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 252
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-03-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yard Conductor for removal of a five (5) day actual suspension and pay for all time lost, including time spent attending investigation. Claimant was involved in the blind shove accident and derailment resulting in the discipline of Switchman in Award No. 251 of this Board. The Board finds from the transcript of investigation, that Claimant understood the danger involved with a blind shove, but simply took a chance and lost.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2003-Award 21
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU-T vs. Missouri Pacific RR - Former C&EI RR Co.)
Award Date: 1982-03-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Switchman for removal of forty-five (45) day actual suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was charged with responsibility in connection with an accident caused when a car which had been kicked into Track No. 1 rolled out and collided with another car being kicked into Track 9. The Board holds that the apparent reason for the car to roll out of Track 1 was due to high winds, which caused the car to sail. Further, the Carrier failed in their burden to prove Claimant was guilty of rule violations with which he had been charged.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2003-Award 23
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU-T vs. Missouri Pacific RR - Former C&EI RR Co.)
Award Date: 1982-03-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of two (2) Switchmen for reinstatement with seniority and other rights unimpaired and pay for all time lost and claim of another Switchman for removal of a thirty (30) day deferred suspension in connection with a blind shove which resulted in cars rolling out of the South end of Track 9 while Claimants were shoving cars in the track from the North end. The Board finds that Claimants should have properly contacted the Yardmaster for current information as to the status of Track 9 prior to making the blind shove or placed themselves in a position to protect the movement prior to same being made. The Board rejects the Organization's contention that the investigation was fatally deficient.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2003-Award 26
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU-T vs. Missouri Pacific RR - Former C&EI RR Co.)
Award Date: 1982-03-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of one Brakeman for removal of ten (10) day suspension and pay for time lost and denies claim of Head Brakeman for removal of sixteen (16) month suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimants were involved in an accident resulting in the Engineer being found guilty of Rule "G" violation and discipline to train crew members. The Board finds the ten (10) day suspension of the rear brakeman to be totally lacking of any rule violation, however, the Head Brakeman rode the engine and clearly sanctioned its operation by an unqualified employee.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2003-Award 27
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU-T vs. Missouri Pacific RR - Former C&EI RR Co.)
Award Date: 1982-03-03 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of letter of reprimand from his personal record. Claimant was disciplined for failure to fill out an accident report form in connection with a derailment of his engine and a car. The Board finds that the Carrier failed to prove that regulations required Claimant to file the report when the Conductor of the crew filed the report as required.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 79
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Fort Worth & Denver Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1982-03-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of a Switchman for reinstatement to service, but without pay for any time lost. Claimant was dismissed for failing to properly secure cars in violation of operating rules. Said cars rolled out when additional cars were kicked into the track, causing derailment and equipment damage. In view of Claimant's past discipline in a relatively short period of time for identical rule violations, the Board states that this is Claimant's last chance, and further rule violation will be tantamount to dismissal.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 83
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Fort Worth & Denver Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1982-03-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of a ten (10) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failing to take proper care to insure the track was clear prior to a reverse engine movement, which resulted in damage to another engine. The Board finds, from the record, that Claimant did not check to see if the engine was moved, but assumed it had been moved.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 964-Award 429
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern Railway Company
Award Date: 1982-03-01 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claims of two (2) Trainmen for restoration to service and pay for all time lost after being dismissed for operating rule violations. Claimant's train operated in excess of speed restrictions throughout the trip, finally wrecking at a twenty-five (25) mile curve while travelling 52 MPH. The Board finds from the number of times the train ran beyond the limit, and the high speed at the time of the wreck, clearly placed them in flagrant violation of the rules.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 912-Award 585
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-03-01 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Yardman for removal of ten (10) day deferred suspension from his service record and pay for all time lost. Claimant received discipline for improperly throwing a switch. The Board finds Claimant had forty-one (41) years' service with the Carrier and that the evidence reveals that he only raised the handle half way when it became necessary to face the switch.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2772-Award 2
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU vs. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Rwy. Co. - WL
Award Date: 1982-02-28 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yardman for removal of fifteen (15) demerits from his personal record and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant was charged with improperly lining a split point derail in connection with his train movement, which resulted in his train being overtaken by a cut of cars which rolled out of a yard track and collided with his train. Organization claims denial of due process in that certain witnesses were not called, but contention is rejected by the Board. The Board finds that under the circumstances of record, Claimant was in violation of operating rules and that discipline was not excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2772-Award 3
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU vs. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Rwy. Co. - WL
Award Date: 1982-02-28 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Yardman by reducing discipline of thirty (30) demerits to twenty (20) demerits. The facts of record are the same as in Award No. 2 of this Board, however, the Board notes that Claimant was an employee of the Carrier for six (6) months and working under the direct supervision of the Engine Foreman. The Board finds discipline of thirty (30) demerits excessive because of discipline imposed on Claimant in Award No. 2 in connection with derailments when he first started working.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2772-Award 4
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU vs. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Rwy. Co. - WL
Award Date: 1982-02-28 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yardman for removal of discipline, which amounted to approximately three and one-half (3-1/2) months' suspension, and pay for all time lost. Facts of record are identical to those in award No. 2 of this Board, and Claimant was Engine Foreman in charge of the crew. Based upon Claimant's past record, the Board finds the time held out of service not to be arbitrary or excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2757-Award 14
Neutral: Irving T. Bergman
Parties: UTU-T vs. Burlington Northern, Inc. Former SP&S)
Award Date: 1982-02-25 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of a Yard Foreman by reducing a ten (10) day suspension to a five (5) day suspension and allows pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was found responsible for violation of operating rules which resulted in a derailment and damage to cars. Organization contends that certain inaccuracies in the transcript prejudiced Claimant, but this contention is rejected by the Board. In reducing the discipline imposed, the Board, upon review of Claimant's personal record, determines a five (5) day suspension to be appropriate.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2894-Award 2
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern, Inc.
Award Date: 1982-02-24 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of an Engineer by reducing a thirty (30) day suspension to a fifteen (15) day suspension and allows pay for time lost in excess thereof. The Board finds that Claimant was responsible for failing to exercise due diligence in the performance of his duties which resulted in derailment and property damage. However, Carrier's determination that to hold Claimant solely responsible for the accident is arbitrary in light of the evidence of record.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2894-Award 4
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern, Inc.
Award Date: 1982-02-24 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of a Hostler for reinstatement to service, but without pay for time lost and subject to his completing, and complying with the terms and conditions of Carrier's Alcohol Rehabilitation Program. Claimant operated a four-unit diesel consist at an excessive speed, resulting in a rough coupling and damage to equipment. Although Claimant was not intoxicated at the time of the incident, the record clearly shows he was in violation of Rule "G". The Board finds that, by requiring Claimant to take part in the program, he can not help but realize the seriousness of infraction of Rule "G" and the enormous impact that mixing alcohol and duty can create.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 94-Award 319
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.
Award Date: 1982-02-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of a Yardman for reinstatement to service and pay for all time lost in excess of six (6) months. Claimant was dismissed for violation of safety rules and general notices when he was observed standing on top of a frog and leaning over a coupler on a freight car, checking the angle cock on the opposite side. The Board finds sufficient evidence to justify serious discipline, but permanent discharge is too severe.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 94-Award 321
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.
Award Date: 1982-02-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension from his personal record and pay for all time lost. Claimant, a rear brakeman, was charged with responsibility when his train passed a stop and stay signal without proper permission, resulting in a near collision. The record reveals adverse weather conditions and marred caboose windows, which was not refuted at the hearing. The Board finds that Carrier has failed to establish Claimant's responsibility.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2662
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago & North Western Trans. Co.
Award Date: 1982-02-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Yard Foreman for removal of a fifteen (15) day suspension and pay for all time lost, including time spent attending the investigation. Claimant was disciplined for failure to perform his duties in a prompt and efficient manner. The Board finds from the record, that there is not sufficient evidence from which the Carrier could conclude that Claimant failed to perform his duties in a proper manner.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2900-Award 23
Neutral: Irving T. Bergman
Parties: UTU vs. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe - Coast Lines
Award Date: 1982-02-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yardman for removal of fifteen (15) demerits from his personal record. Following investigation, Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rules pertaining to the handling and safe movement of cars, setting sufficient hand brakes to prevent movement, and others, which resulted in the derailment of two (2) cars after they had rolled a distance of approximately one (1) mile through the yard. The Board rejects procedural objections raised by the Organization, and holds that the investigation was fair and impartial. Further, the Board finds that Claimant failed to take all the action which might reasonably have been expected of him and the discipline assessed was not unduly harsh nor excessive, arbitrary or capricious.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 105
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Fort Worth & Denver Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1982-02-01 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of censure from his personal record and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant's road train consisted of 108 loads, 1 empty, 14,175 tons, and 5 diesel units. This train went into emergency eight (8) times during the course of its road trip and once again after arrival at its final terminal. When the train was turned over to a foreign Carrier crew, flat spots were discovered on some of the diesel units and an inspection was made. At the investigation, Claimant admitted to rule violation in that he failed to inspect his train at anytime during the road trip. The Board finds that common sense, as well as the rule, would require some sort of inspection in view of the eight (8) emergencies this train went into and there is no basis to set aside the discipline.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 106
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Fort Worth & Denver Ry. Co.
Award Date: 1982-02-01 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Brakeman for removal of censure and pay for time lost attending investigation. Claimant herein was a Brakeman of the train crew involved in Award No. 105 of this Board and this claim is denied in accordance with the findings contained therein.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1483-Award 56
Neutral: Robert M. O'Brien
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Maine Central-Portland Terminal
Award Date: 1982-01-22 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Trainman for the reduction in the number of demerit marks assessed his personal record from 25 to 15. Claimant signed a waiver of investigation, thus admitting his guilt in connection with a sideswipe accident. However, since the Conductor of the crew only received 15 demerit marks for the same incident the Organization feels the discipline imposed on Claimant was excessive, particularly in view of his relative inexperience. The Board finds that Claimant was familiar with the rule he admitted violating and the discipline was neither harsh, arbitrary or excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1483-Award 57
Neutral: Robert M. O'Brien
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Maine Central-Portland Terminal
Award Date: 1982-01-22 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Conductor by reducing discipline of 20 demerit marks to 10 demerit marks assessed to his personal record. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with making up a train in reverse station order, causing the Carrier to pay penalty claims to the road crew assigned to the train. Claimant signed a waiver indicating admission of guilt, however, this appeal is because it is felt the discipline was harsh, arbitrary and excessive. The Board finds that discipline for the offense is warranted, but the degree of discipline assessed in this case is clearly excessive.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 140-Award 5807
Neutral: David Dolnick
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific
Award Date: 1982-01-21 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Switchman for removal of a 30-day deferred suspension and one year probation and pay for all time lost. The Board finds that Claimant allowed a car to be kicked in excess of ten (10) miles per hour, in violation of the operating rules, which resulted in damage to coil steel on another car. There is no reason to set aside the discipline imposed by the carrier.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2929-Award 2
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-01-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of an Engineer by reducing a thirty (30) day suspension to a twenty (20) day suspension. Claimant was disciplined for failing to use due care when he ran past an absolute stop signal and then shoved his train through a crossover, which caused damage to the crossover switch. The Board finds no basis to substitute its judgment for that of the Carrier, however, in view of Claimant's clean record in his fourteen (14) years of service, discipline is reduced accordingly.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2929-Award 10
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-01-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for removal of a fifteen (15) day actual suspension. Claimant was disciplined for failing to restrict train speed to 25 MPH, causing twenty-four (24) cars of his train to be derailed. The Board finds that the evidence of record supports the discipline imposed.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2929-Award 9
Neutral: Harold M. Weston
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-01-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of an Engineer by reducing a ninety (90) day suspension to a sixty (60) day suspension. Claimant was disciplined for failure to stop short of an absolute stop indication. In reducing the discipline, the Board notes Claimant's inexperience, as he had only been an engineer a few months and the fact that he had a train with 151 loads of coal. However, the Board warns of the severity involved and greater discipline could be warranted for the violation.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 233
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-01-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Trainman for removal of thirty (30) demerits from his personal record and pay for time lost attending the investigation. Claimant was disciplined for violation of operating rule pertaining to flagging after sudden stops. The Board finds that evidence adduced through testimony of the Conductor is insufficient to support any discipline of Claimant.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2664-Award 6
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Award Date: 1982-01-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor for removal of a fifteen (15) day actual suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to provide proper flagging protection and allegedly using abusive language to a Patrolman. Organization appeals the discipline on the basis that it was excessive, however, the Board finds that in view of the evidence, it was not.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1312-Award 633
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Baltimore & Ohio RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-01-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yard Helper for removal of a fifteen (15) day actual suspension from his service record and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with a sideswipe. The Board finds sufficient evidence to support Carrier's conclusion that the accident could have been avoided had there not been negligence and poor train handling.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1312-Award 634
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Baltimore & Ohio RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-01-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yard Helper for removal of discipline from his service record and pay for all time lost. This case is a companion to that resulting in Award No. 633 of this Board, and claim is denied in accordance with those findings.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1312-Award 636
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Baltimore & Ohio RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-01-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Head Brakeman for removal of thirty (30) day actual suspension and pay for all time lost, including wage equivalent of fringe benefits. Claimants were disciplined for running an absolute "stop" indication. The Board finds that there was sufficient evidence adduced to support Carrier's conclusion and, in view of the seriousness of the offense, the discipline was not excessive.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1312-Award 641
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Baltimore & Ohio RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-01-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Foreman and Helpers for removal of discipline and pay for all time lost. Claimants were involved in an accident resulting in a personal injury to one of the crew members. The Board finds, by Claimants' own admission, that the rules were violated and the discipline assessed by the Carrier to be reasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2709-Award 79
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU vs. Houston Belt & Terminal Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-01-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yardman for removal of a ten (10) day deferred suspension from his record. Claimant was disciplined for his responsibility in connection with a derailment of his train when it ran a switch lined against him. The Board, upon review of the evidence of record, finds Claimant was riding the lead unit to give signals and protect the head end, and should have seen that the target on the switch involved was red.
View Award

Special Board of Adjustment No. 423-Award 257
Neutral: Robert A. Franden
Parties: UTU vs. Port Terminal Railroad Association
Award Date: 1982-01-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engine Foreman for removal of a 5-day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was charged with violation of operating rules which resulted in damage to 150 feet of rail beyond repair. The Board finds that with the exception of testimony by the yardmaster at the location where the incident occurred, the evidence against Claimant is totally circumstantial, and the carrier has failed to meet their burden of proof that Claimant's negligence was the reason for damage to this section of track.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2369-Award 5
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Award Date: 1981-12-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Yardmen for removal of a thirty-one (31) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimants were charged with violation of a multitude of general and operating rules when, during the course of making a blind shove, they shoved cars into the side of another train. The Organization contends that the Yardmaster who gave the instructions to the Claimants to make this movement was responsible for the protection of the movement, as this has been the practice in this yard. However, the Board finds that Claimants were in violation of a rule and that the violation was proven in a fair and impartial investigation, which was timely held, and the discipline assessed was not unreasonable.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2369-Award 7
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Award Date: 1981-12-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of a ninety (90) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was disciplined for failure to take necessary action to stop his train prior to reaching a point where sled gang was working. The Board finds that there is insufficient evidence to support such a finding of Claimant's guilt. The record reflects that the Engineer was braking his train with some difficulty, however, there was no cause for Claimant to place the train in emergency or do anything other than what he did.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2677-Award 17
Neutral: Neil P. Speirs
Parties: BLE vs. Burlington Northern, Inc.
Award Date: 1981-12-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for removal of discipline from his record and pay for all time lost and pay for attending the investigation. Claimant was charged with negligence when the train he was operating collided with a motor car. The Board finds that Carrier failed in its burden of proof to show Claimant operated his train in a negligent manner.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2937-Award 1
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: BLE vs. Western Pacific RR Co.
Award Date: 1981-12-08 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of an Engineer for reinstatement to service with seniority unimpaired, but without pay for time lost, subject to his passing the required physical examination and book of Operating Rules. Claimant was charged with multiple rule violations which resulted in derailment of several cars, total destruction of a caboose and three (3) locomotive units, death of two (2) train crew members and injury to two (2) others. Based upon a total of 2,942 pages of testimony, including transcript of investigation, NTSB accident report, and parties submission, the Board finds that Claimant did exercise poor judgment by providing excess power and speed to the rear of an occupied caboose, which caused the derailment. However, mitigating circumstances, weighed upon all the factors in this incident, would appear that discipline imposed by Carrier to be disproportionate as the record clearly shows Carrier officers to be equally at fault in the case of this severe and fatal accident.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2544-Award 10
Neutral: Jack A. Warshaw
Parties: UTU-E vs. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Award Date: 1981-11-25 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part the claim of a Fireman, by reducing a fifteen (15) day suspension to a five (5) day suspension and allowing pay for time lost in excess thereof. Claimant was charged with violation of Rule "G" and absenting himself from duty, plus several other rules relating thereto. After reviewing the record of this case, the Board finds that the Carrier failed to prove that Claimant was, in fact, in possession of an alcoholic beverage. However, Claimant did fail to devote himself exclusively to the business of the Carrier and a five (5) day suspension is warranted.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2544-Award 11
Neutral: Jack A. Warshaw
Parties: UTU-E vs. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Award Date: 1981-11-25 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Fireman for removal of a ninety (90) day suspension and pay for all time lost. Claimant was assessed discipline for his responsibility in connection with a rear end collision as a result of failing to properly comply with signal aspects governing speed restrictions and train operations. The Board finds that the discipline was neither harsh, arbitrary nor excessive in light of the seriousness of the offense.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 717-Award 504
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-T vs. Burlington Northern RR Co.
Award Date: 1981-11-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of reprimand from his service record, and pay for attending the investigation, but denies claim of Conductor for pay for time lost, removal of the sixty (60) day deferred suspension, pay for attending the investigation and restitution of any loss of fringe benefits. Claimant Brakeman called Conductor's attention to a "dangerous" material car three cars from the caboose. The Conductor decided that he should not delay the train to make the switch of the car deeper into the train. The Board finds that Claimant Brakeman did all that would be reasonably required of him, but Claimant Conductor did not act within the rules.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1312-Award 622
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Baltimore & Ohio RR Co.
Award Date: 1981-11-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Brakeman for removal of discipline from his service record and allows actual time for pay for attending the investigation with a minimum of two (2) hours. Claimant, a Head Brakeman, was assessed a thirty (30) day overhead suspension for his responsibility in connection with his train failing to stop short of a signal display and stop indication. The Board finds that Carrier failed in its burden of proof, as the transcript reflects that when Claimant called the signal indication to the Engineer's attention, the train was already in emergency, thus vitiating Claimant's obligation to apply the emergency brake valve.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 1312-Award 628
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Baltimore & Ohio RR Co.
Award Date: 1981-11-19 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Trainman for removal of discipline from his service record and pay for actual time spent attending the investigation with a minimum of two (2) hours. Claimant was reprimanded for failure to comply with the rules when he did not provide himself with proper appliance (lantern) ready for immediate use, resulting in a delay of his train. The Board finds insufficient evidence to support Carrier's conclusion and that the Carrier failed to prove its case.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 223
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1981-11-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Engineer for the removal of thirty (30) demerits from his service record and one day's pay for time lost attending the investigation. Claimant was cited with violation of various operating rules governing the safe movement and operation of his train. The Board finds that under the circumstances, Claimant was entitled to rely on the signals of his Head Brakeman which Claimant had no duty to verify. Further, of the rules with which Claimant was charged, only one rule had the slightest relevance.
View Award

Public Law Board No. 2143-Award 184
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU vs. Seaboard Coast Line RR Co.
Award Date: 1981-11-17 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Trainman for removal of a thirty (30) day suspension from his service record and pay for all time lost. The Board finds that the record will not support a finding that Claimant violated any of the rules with which he was cited.
View Award