(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Kansas City Terminal Railway Company

(1) The suspension of nine (9) days imposed upon Working Foreman G. H. Kruschek and Station Maintainer T. P. Foreman was improper, without just and sufficient cause and based upon unproven charges (System File MW-3.72.30).

 (2) The personal record of the claimants be cleared of said suspension and reimbursement be made for wage loss suffered all in accordance with Rule 22.

 OPINION OF BOARD: The Carrier suspended Claimants from service for
 a period of nine working days on the charge of
 "unauthorized entry into private property." The circumstances were
 these: Certain doors at the Union Station were normally locked. The
 keys therefor were in the custody of and for the sole use of the Car
 rier's security forces. When the Carrier's station maintainers re
 quired access through one of these locked doors, it was necessary for
 them to call a security officer to unlock the door. One of such doors
 was the entrance to elevator pit 64 which also served as the entrance
 to the lower level of a restaurant, The Landmark Colony, Inc., housed
 within the Union Station, but not a part of the Union Station and
 deemed to be "private property". During Claimant's regular tour of
 duty on March 23, 1972, at approximately 3:00 A.M., they noticed that
 the door to elevator 64 pit was unlocked and that the lights were on.
 They regarded this unusual condition as suspicious, calling for an
 immediate investigation. They went through the unlocked door, found
 nothing amiss on the lower level, heard people at work on the upper
 level whom they presumed to be restaurant employees, concluded that
 everything was in order, and left, locking the door behind them. The
 dock area of the restaurant was checked to confirm the presumption
 that restaurant employees were still working, and concluding that
 nothing was amiss, routine work was resumed.

 Careful review of the record shows that the elevator pit 64 entrance was not marked "private property" and that there were no instructions by the Carrier forbidding its employees the use of this entrance. More to the point, the record shows no instructions to the


employees concerning what they must or must not do in the event of finding an unlocked door, with lights on, at approximately 3:00 A.M.$ giving reasonable rise for suspicion.

 Under the unusual and suspicious circumstances of this particular case, it is unnecessary to conclude that the Claimants acted reasonably and commendably to safeguard the interests of the Carrier, or to conclude that the Carrier's concern for the safety of Claimants in a possibly dangerous situation was well-warranted. It is sufficient, on a careful review of the record before us, to find that there is a lack of evidence to support the discipline.



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
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and








ATTEST: 4i lA/· &Executive Secretary

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 11th day of April 1974.

 w\. F 16~