(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim on behalf of the General Committee of the


On behalf of R. L. Miller for reinstatement to service with all lost pay and benefits restored effective October 31, 1984, account of his alleged violation of Rule 'G' on October 18, 1984. Carrier File 2-SG-754."

 OPINION OF BOARD: On October 19, 1984, Claimant, with 14 years of service,
 was notified to attend an Investigation on October 25. He
 was charged with being under the influence of intoxicants while on duty on
 October 18, 1984.

 On October 31, 1984, the Manager Engineering wrote Claimant informing him as a result of the Investigation he was found to have violated Rule G and was dismissed.

 The General Chairman by letter of November 19, 1984, requested a Hearing to appeal Carrier's decision. During handling on the property Carrier wrote the General Chairman that his letter had not been received until November 26, 1984, and that t were timely. The Organization now states Postal Receipts show the letter was received on November 23, 1984, but it made no such response, nor did it offer the receipts, on the property. The Carrier in turn claimed the Manager of Engineering had never been notified of rejection of his decision in violation of Rule requirements. This position was not developed further on the property. Thus this Board is no Claim.

 There was sufficient evidence introduced at the Investigation to support Carrier's conclusion that Claimant had violated Rule G. It is not for this Board to interfere with that finding. However we do note Claimant had 14 years of service and there is no evidence of any prior problems or Rule infractions. Thus, despite o the discipline, in the circumstances, was excessive. We will therefore require Claimant be reinstate
A condition of Claimant's reinstatement will be his participation in any employee assistance program Carrier maintains ptovided the program counselor determines Claimant
                      Docket Number SG-26884


        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 discipline was excessive.


                        A W A R D


        Claim sustained in accordance with the Opinion.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


          7


Attest:
 Nancy J. D ever - Executive Secretary Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 27th day of October 1987.