(Darrell Claiborne PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: This office represents Darrell Claiborne, a former Amtrak
 employee. This letter is to serve notice, as required by
 the Rules of the National Railroad Adjustment Board, of my client's intention
 to file a submission within thirty days from date of this notice, covering an
 unadjusted dispute between Mr. Claiborne and his former employer, Amtrak.

 The specific question involved is whether or not Mr. Claiborne was terminated from his employment with or without just cause and, whether or not the hearing leading to his termination was fair and impartial.

 The facts involving Mr. Claiborne's termination involved alleged charges of immoral conduct for a passenger on an Amtrak train.

 OPINION OF BOARD: This claim is faulted with a procedural defect.

 The Claimant was alleged to have made sexual advances to a young female passenger on board Amtrak Train 11 on April 24, 1977. Charges were filed and an investigation held on the charges on May 5 and 9, 1977. The Carrier found Claimant guilty as charged and dismissed him from its service effective May 18, 1977. The Organization appealed through the agreed-upon appeal procedures to the highest officer designated to handle such matters on August 29, 1977, when Mr. C. L. Dellums, Vice Chairman of the Amtrak Service Workers Council, met with Mr. G. F. Daniels of the Carrier and pleaded for Claimant's reinstatement. The appeal was denied by the highest officer in conference and confirmed by letter on September 20, 1977. This decision was not appealed to this Board until May 25, 1979, when Claimant's attorney so notified the Board, twenty (20) months after the final decision was made on the property.





Claimant's attorney in his brief pleads ignorance of the rule which cannot be accepted by this Board. He also contends Claimant was not notified by Carrier of the final decision of September 20, 1977. Rule T (d) clearly provides that the Claimant "or his duly accredited representative" may make appeals to the Director of Labor Relations who was, at the time the Agreement was signed, the highest officer designated to handle such matters. Mr. Dellums was Claimant's "duly accredited representative" who had the right under the Agreement to make the appeal in behalf of the Claimant. In accordance with existing procedures Mr. Daniels confirmed the decision made in conference on August 29, 1977, by letter on September 20, 1977 to the Chairman of the Amtrak Workers Service Council with copy to the Vice Chairman, Mr. Dellums. There is no requirement in the rule to give the Claimant a copy of the decision letter when he did not make the appeal himself.

 A hearing was held by the Board on October 14, 1980 with this Referee present but neither party was represented.

 It is clear to this Board that Claimant failed to notify the Carrier of his intention to appeal the decision of September 20, 1977 within the agreedupon time limit of ni time limit rule and should be dismissed.

 FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the parties
 to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and upon the whole
 record and all the evidence, finds and holds:

 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 claim is barred under the time Limit rule.


                        A W A R D


        Claim dismissed.


                                f.9TIOtYAh RAILROAD ADJ'U$y~;ri EOAFD

                                By Order of ThL^d Division


ATTEST: __4~Execut ve Secretary

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 15th day of December 1980.