(Raymond F. Boise
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Maine Central Railroad Company
 ( Portland Terminal Company

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "This is to serve notice as required by the Rules
 of the National Railroad Adjustment Board of
 Mr. Boies' intention to file an ex-part: submission on August 22, 1978,
 covering his unadjusted dispute with the Maine Central Railroad Company.

 The claim involved is whether Mr. Boies was terminated by the employer in violation of Article II, Rule 22 (a) of the then current effective agreement between the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees and the Maine Central Railroad - Portland Terminal Company."

 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant was accepted for temporary employment
 on June 13, 1977, but he was terminated on July 27,
 1977 for failing to show (on his employment application form) two
 recent arrests for driving while under the influence of liquor and
 one other violation.

 Claim was submitted seeking reinstatement, because Article IV, Rule 22 (a) provides that no employe "...who has worked more than thirty (30) consecutive work days..." shall be discharged without a hearing. Carrier points out that the Employe was hired as a "temporary employe" with government funds for a specific ballasting, rail laying and tie renewal project. Further, it asserts that because the Scope Rule specifically excludes temporary employes, Rule 22 (a) is not applicable. Carrier points out that Claimant agreed, in writing, when making application, to accept "temporary employment pending approval of this application" and he understood that if it was not approved, his employment "may be terminated."

 Limiting our consideration to the factual matters properly raised while the dispute was under review on the property, we are inclined to find that the Carrier's actions were not improper. A Carrier may dismiss an employe for falsification of an employment application, which was the case here. In a given case, it may be required to afford a hearing, but the Scope Rule in this agreement is


clear. It says that the rules do not govern "temporary employes." Thus, a hearing was not required prior to the action of termination.

        FINDINGS; The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, 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 Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

        That the Agreement was not violated.


                    A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                        NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                        By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:
 Executive Secretary

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 14th day of December 1979.