Edward L. Suntrup, Referee

(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks, ( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Emplo PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company
(1) Carrier violated Rules of the effective Clerk-Telegrapher Agreement when, on June 1, 1980, it un dismissed Operator W. L. Burley from service of the Carrier, and
 (2) As a result of such impropriety, Carrier shall be required to reinstate Mr. W. L. Burley to his former position and compensate him for all wages lost commencing June 1, 1980, and continuing until reinstated."
 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant, Mr. W. L. Burley, has been employed by the Carrier
 approximately 7 years. At the time of the incident he held
 regular assignment as an Operator at "JD" Tower, Hyattsville, Maryland, 3:00 to
 11:00 P.M. shift. Under date of May 12, 1980 Claimant was notified to attend an
 investigation on May 16, 1980. Claimant was charged with "being under the
 influence of intoxicants at or about 7:00 P.M. on may 11, 1980 while on duty..."
 On June 1, 1980 Claimant was notified that he had been found guilty as charged
 and was dismissed from service. After appeal on property by the Organization up
 to and including the highest designated officer, this case is now before the
 National Railroad Adjustment Board.
 Organization's claim, on procedural grounds, is that current Agreement Rule 47 was violated because Division Manager J. M. Emmett, who was the first in line to receive Claimant's appeal on the propert approved the original dismissal decision. In denying this claim this Board notes that due process pr the Rule cited above were, nevertheless, available through the subsequent appeal to the Director of had authority to overturn the decisions of both Division Manager Emmett and the hearing officer, Ass Superintendent W. R. McTheny.

 On merits, a review of the hearing transcript.shows sufficient substantial evidence present to warra conclusion that Claimant is guilty as charged. Substantial evidence is here defined, in the words of "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion" (Cons Board 305 U.S. 197, 229). 'he testimony of General Road Foreman of Engineers Kirk established that C intoxicated state on May 11, 1980. Claimant was described as having slurred speech, an unsteady gate on his breath, and an apparent inability to clearly recognize Mr. Kirk by correct title. This testim hearing by Road Patrolman C. Kaiser, Jr. Organization's


contention is that a combination of medicines ingested by the Claimant because of a heart ailment, p codeine based cough syrup which was 45% alcohol at 90 proof, which produced an apparent "synergism effect", was sufficient grounds to exempt Claimant from the charge levied against him. This Board do agree. If, in fact, Claimant was unable to work on the day in question, or if he knew that he would take medicines which would incapacitate him, it was his responsibility to have notified the Carrier effect under Rule 22 of the current Agreement. By not doing so Claimant created an unsafe wor environment and a safety hazard for his fellow employes and for himself. No railroad can reasonably under such conditions. This Board will not, therefore, disturb Carrier's determination in this matte
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and



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

A W A R D





                            BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 By
 Rosemarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 14th day of April 1983
                                          C~E I VED


JUN 2 8 1983

Office