Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 8997
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 8703
 2-SIRTOA-MA-'82
 The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Joseph A. Sickles when award was rendered.
 ( InternatLonal Association of Machinists and
 Parties to Dispute: ( Aerospace Workers


Dispute: Claim of Employes:




Findings
The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

 The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe within themeaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

 This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.

When the Claimant assertedly refused to permit the Carrier's physician to draw blood samples and take X-rays (which the Carrier felt were necessary to verify the Employee's reported inability to perform duties) the Employee was charged with insubordination and malingering, and he was directed to report to a hearing concerning said charge.

The Carrier contends that the Claimant reported off as "sick" solely to avoid the imposition of certain mandatory fines levied under a "Taylor Act" action, and that the facts and circumstances of record clearly show the Employee's intent in this regard.

 In his testimony at the investigation, the Claimant conceded that he refused to permit the Carrier's physician to include in his examination blood samples and an X-ray, which the Carrier felt were necessary to verify the Claimant's asserted physical condition concerning his ulcer. When asked if he felt that the blood test and the X-ray would constitute a hazard to his health, he stated, "very well might".
 T~ r·°an 1 Award No. 8997
 ?'_..: ~'_ Docket NO. 8703

The Claimant's reluctance was explained in medical terms by the Claimant's personal physician, who outlined the Employee's renal problems and continued dialysis. Nonetheless, the Claimant admitted that he would permit X-rays when a "definite emergency" was involved. Moreover, the testimony demonstrated that on a number of occasions throughout the year the Claimant was subjected to X-ray pictures and to blood drawing.

 Certainly, this Board would not condone any requested Carrier action which
 would place an employee in a serious health jeopardy, or would constitute a
 real hazard to his wellbeing. At the same time, we are quite familiar with the
 often expressed concept that a Carrier has a very broad right to obtain medical
 information about its employees from a physician of its own choosing, and that
 disciplinary sanctions may be imposed if an employee refuses to cooperate. See,
 for example, Award No. 48, zast, Special .of kdJustment No. 589.

 The Board has considered the transcript at length in this case. We feel it a mandatory obligation to assure that we are not sanctioning a disciplinary action which resulted from an activity taken by the Employee based upon a real and objective appraisal that compliance was harmful to his health. Based upon the entire transcript, we are unable to find a valid basis for such a conclusion, and accordingly, we will deny the claim.

    Claim denied.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Second Division


Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

                                      Y


By
 c~ marie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

 Dated a Chicago, Illinois, this 17th day of March, 1982.