AWARD NO. 125 CASE NO. 125 PARTIES T4 THE DISPUTE: United Transportation Union (CT&Y)
The Hoard, upon the whole record and on the evidence, finds that the parties herein are Carrier and Employees within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended: that this Hoard is duly constituted by agreement of the parties; that the Board has jurisdiccion over the dispute, and that the parties were given due notice of the hearing.
The essential facts are not in dispute. On February 14, 1994, claimant provided a urine sample for random drug testing. He adulterated his specimen with glutaraldehyde (Urinaid) to avoid detection of usage of a controlled substance.
Carrier's Rule 607 prohibits dishonesty and warns of dismissal from service for violations. In addition, Carrier's Rule 9, regarding the ruse of Alcohol and Drugs provides as follows:
The organization contends =hat the punishment of dismissal is too harsh in light of the circumstances. It maintains that Claimant had nearly 16 years of apparently ,:nblemished service that should mitigate the situation. The Organization also cited prior awards in support of its position. In addition, the Organization notes that the FRA only mandates a 9 month disqualification where an employee refuses to submit =-- testing. The BRA views tampering with a specimen to be the same as a refusal.
The role of this Board _s limited to that of an appellate review of the record developed 'ay the parties in their handling of the matter on the property. Our charge is to determine whether the record contains substantial evidence to support Carrier's disciplinary action. On the record before us, we find that Carrier's action is supported by substantial evidence. The Claim, therefore, must be denied.