(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


STATEMENT OF CLAIM, "Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood
 of Railroad Signalmen on the former Erie Lackawanna Railway Company:


On behalf of Mr. Paul Burke, Leading Maintainer, for all time lost from March 10 through July 9, 1976, while out of service. on the basis of his physical condition."

 jGeneral Chairman file: #548 - P. Burke - #166241, Atlantic Region/

 OPINION OF BOARD: As result of periodic medical examination by
 Carrier's Medical Examiner, Claimant was- notified under date of March 5, 1976, that, because his condition had been found to be "exogeneously obese," he would be qualified for work for 6 months on condition that he be restricted from climbing poles. However, on Carrier's finding that there were no positions available which did not require Claimant to climb poles, he was advised by Carrier on March 9, 1976, that he would not be permitted to resume duty.

 The Petitioner has progressed this claim contending that the Carrier is in violation of Agreement Appendix "C" - Understanding on Physical Reexaminations. Appendix "C" provides that the General Chairman may progress the matter with the Chief Surgeon and only "upon presentation of written authorization by the employe" the Chief Surgeon will make the medical findings in the case available to the General Chairman. The Claimant's authorization in this case is dated May 6, 1976. After brief interim handling, Claimant was returned to service in mid-July 1976.
 Award Number 22415
 Docket Number SG-22337

 Page 2

 Inasmuch as Claimant was returned to service, the question of the selection of a neutral physician became academic thereafter. To show the Carrier to have been at fault between May 6 and the return of Claimant to service, it would be necessary to show that the Carrier unreasonably delayed in entering into the selection of the the neutral and thereby could reasonably be said to have delayed the Claimant's earlier return. This record does not lend itself to such showing.

 Accordingly, we find that the Carrier has not been shown to have violated Appendix "C". In light of our findings in the merits of this dispute, we find it unnecessary to resolve the procedural issue raised by Carrier.

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;

 ^_~at this Division of the Aojustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

 That the Agreement was not violated.

 A bi A k
Claim denied.

 ATTEST: iw ExecutiveSecretary

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

By Order of Third Division


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30ta day of May 1979.