Award No. 52 Docket No. 61 PARTIES: Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes TO DISPUTE'.: Chicago and North western Transport-Lion Company










FIr?DINGS:

This Board, anon the whole record one all the evidnnca, finds maneVolds th?± the °mrloyes and the Carripr involved, ?re respectively emolones and Carrier wtthin +he mes.ntnr of the Rai1way Wor .act 4s amended, ajf thal ':he Board has JurisFiction over the dispute herein.

Claimant was emrloyed by the Carrier as a machine operator and. on February 6, 1984, was ordered to report at Short Line Yard at Des Moines, Iowa, at 7:15 A.M. to operate a Jordan ditcher to clear snow. On February 6, 1984, he was directed to anpe?r for formal investieatibn scheduled for February 9, 1994, on the charge:



The investiaption was conducted as scheduled. Claimant was present thr^uzhout the investi7ation and was represented. A transcript of the investixation has been made a part of the record.

In the investigation the Trainmaster headouartered at Des Motnes testified that about 10:15 the morning of rebruary 6, 1984, claimant came to his office innuirina as "o the whereabouts of the ditcher, at which time he detected a distinct odor of alcohol on claimpnt's breath, at which time he called theAssistant Roadmaster and the Special Agent it Des Moines.

The AsRistant Roadmaster testified that when he confronted claimant at the location of the ditcher, he detected the odor of alcohol on claimant's breath; that a field sobriety test was given to





clpiment; that claimant consented to-a blood alcohol test and r?hen the results of that test were received, claimant was removed from service.

The Saeciel ?sent corroborated the t=stimony of the Assistant Roadmaster; stated that he Derformed the field sobriety test; th?t he renuested claimant to submit to a blood alcohol test,, which clsimpnt consented to.

The blood alcohol test showed a blood ratio of .124. at about 12:15 P.M. on February 6, 1984, which was in excess of what is considered intoxication under the Iowa law pertaining to. .the operation of motor vehicles, -here the ratio is .100.

In the investigation claimant-admitted having consumed alsochol the Drior night from about 6:30 P.M. to 12:30 A.M., thpt he had about two hours sleep the previous night before reporti.n:r fof duty about 7:00 A:M. Claimant was notified of his dismiss^1 -on February 15, 19`14.

Carrier's Rule G and Rule G Addition were read into t=e tnv*qt1twPtion and will not be repeated here.

From the entire record vie find that substanti&Z evidence was presented at the investixation in suntort of the charxe of viola`ion of pule Cz a.nO that claimant was on duty and=r the influence of intoxicants on February 6, 1984. There is no proper basis for the Hoard to Interfere with the discicline imposed, especiallv when we consir~er that claimant was takins_ u_p service for the purpose of operating on-track ecuicment.

                      A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                      Lhairman, Neutral Member

          FL

C r. _= mbe . Labor Member

DAted: ~.C'-7` ~. ~~T3·~ .