NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD
THIRD DIVISION

 Walter C. Wallace, Referee

 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

 Award Number 21192
 Docket Number SG-21264

 (Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
(The Texas and Pacific Railway Company


Company:
ber 31, 1973, for reinstatement as Signal Maintainer at Centennial Yard,
 with back pay for time lost, and with all rights, vacation time and seniority
 unimpaired. ZC-arrier file: H 315-6J

 OPINION OF HOARD: This claim, unless it has already been adjusted, in
 volved an array of issues that seemed to increase as
 it reached higher levels of consideration. The underlying matter is a
 disciplinary dismissal imposed upon claimant as a consequence of his con
 viction of the crime of possession of a quantity of a narcotic drug
 (marihuana), alleged to be a felony under Texas law. Claimant had entered
 a plea of guilty and the conviction was based upon ouch plea. An investiga
 tion and hearing was held on the property sad the Organization did not
 represent claimant at the hearing; its representation came at a later stage.
 Claimant had sought representation by a lawyer unconnected with the Organiza
 tion but such representation was not permitted by the hearing officer based
 upon as interpretation of the applicable rules. Thereafter, at the hearing
 claimant represented himself and his sole defense, based upon the opinion
 of counsel, wen that his conviction was not a final. decree sad following his
 probation his record would be cleared. Further, claimant maintained that
 pursuant to law marihuana was no longer classified as a narcotic drug and
 his crime was not a felon. Subsequently, on the day of the hearing claim
 ant was dismissed based upon the conclusions reached that claimant had
 violated General Rules A and C of the Rules and Regulations for Maintenance
 of Way and Structures because of his conviction of a felony offense of un
 lawful, possession of a narcotic drug. Claimant thereafter made appeal to
 successive levels of supervision seeking reinstatement, back pay for time
 lost, etc..

 It is undisputed that claimant failed to notify Carrier representatives within 60 days is writin is no contention that Carrier waived its application and we must conclude that claimant did not comply with the rule and his claim is barred from consideration by the Hoard.<


We subscribe to the views expressed by Referee Weston in Award 8564 of this division and concur that appeal by claimant is not the equivalent to the required notice of rejection of the decision of the representatives of the Carrier. A decision, such as this, that is not on the merits is less than satisfying. Nevertheless, the rules established by the parties are explicit and they may not be avoided. Accordingly, the claim is dismissed.

        FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Hoard; upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:


        That the parties waived oral hearing;


That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;

 That this Division of the Adjustment Hoard has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

        That the claim be dismissed.


                    A W A R D


        Claim is dismissed.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


        ATTEST: Executive Secretary


        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 13th day of August 1976.