UTU leaders want to protect their union job while sacrificing yours.
UTU leaders want to cover up their own mistakes, especially the 1985 UTU Halloween agreement.
If a single craft of "Train and Engine Service Employees" is created, it will be much easier for the carriers to demand that our seniority lists be combined. The UTU leaders will be powerless to defend against this demand, because the carrier's position will be based on the very arguments made by the UTU leadership since January of 1998.
The right, through a petition process, to place the question of recalling an international officer to a vote. If members vote to remove the officer, the recalled officer will be removed.
The right to vote, by referendum, on the ratification of all wage rules movements - as well as the right to vote, by referendum, on the question of accepting a proffer of arbitration. The right to be part of the 'supreme" governing body of the BLE, between conventions of the International Division.
The right to initiate, through a petition process, changes in the Rules, Constitution or any policy of the BLE. The majority of votes cast by the active membership shall determine the outcome of an initiative.
The right, through a petition process, to require the President to hold up any enactment of the convention. The majority of votes cast by the active membership shall determine the outcome of a referendum and the decision shall be final for at least two years.
The right to direct the vote of the local chairman on the vote of a division regarding the issue of ratifying local or system proposed agreements not part of a concerted movement. The general chairman is governed by the instructions of the majority of the local chairmen involved.
The right to instruct a delegate on how to vote on an issue before the Convention.
The right to vote on a proposed merger or affiliation with another union.
AFL-CIO President John Sweeney submitted a brief supporting the BLE position at the NMB hearings and a motion to dismiss the UTU application without a hearing.
The AFL-CIO Transportation Trades Department (TTD), Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way, Brotherhood of Railway Signalmen, ATDD and five Shop Craft Unions also submitted briefs supporting the BLE.
The 13.1 million members of the AFL-CIO support the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers.
AFL-CIO rail unions voted unanimously to condemn UTU on its petition to the NMB.
An impartial umpire ruled that UTU is in violation of Article XX of the AFL-CIO constitution for its backdoor raid through the NMB
The railroads cannot make a request to combine crafts. it must come from a labor union. This is an objective that serves the carriers.
If a single craft of "Train and Engine Service Employees" is created, it will make it easier for the railroads to eliminate jobs of rail workers.
If a single craft of "Train and Engine Service Employees" is created, how long do you think it will be before the carriers will demand single extra boards to cover the new craft?
Throughout the presentation of its case, the UTU made every attempt to minimize the differences between the crafts.
Initially, the UTU stated: ''... as a matter of functional integration and community of interest, the line between the craft or class of engineers on the one hand, and conductors and trainmen on the other, has been blurred to the point of extinction."
However, the record provided by UPRR showed a much different situation than UTU would have one believe. Between 1/5/99 and 4/5/99, on the UPRR, out of a total of 1,204,435 calls for service only 264 (.02% - that is 2 times out of each 10,000 calls) involved instances where an employee working in one craft was used to work an assignment in another craft (between train service and the craft of engineer and vice versa) - So much for the concept of functional integration.
Between 1/5/99 and 415199, only 89 individuals were called from either a trainmen's assignment/board and used as an engineer or called off of an engineer's assignment/board and used as a trainman. This is out of a work force of 22,700 and represents a cross-utilization of .39% of the individuals in a 91-day period of time - so much for the concept of functional integration.
The record also showed that out of a total of 13,500 train service employees on LJPRR, 8,330 (61.7%) were pre-I 985 trainmen, not subject to mandatory promotion to the craft of Engineer - so much for blurring the craft lines to the point of extinction.
UTU argued that the existence of the "Incidental Work Rules' was a basis for the combining the crafts.
BLE presented evidence that the core work of each craft did not overlap. That it took an Engineer's seniority date and an Engineer's license to be able to operate the train from point A to point B. BLE also submitted evidence, from Side Letter #7 of the Award of Arbitration Board #458, that the 'Incidental Work" could be required of an Engineer only in connection with his own train and only if the craft that normally performed the service was not available to do it.
BLE also argued that rights to service as an Engineer were totally governed by the Engineers' seniority date and that an Engineer could not bid on a train service job unless he/she had insufficient seniority to work as an Engineer.
UTU argued that things changed when the Firemen's craft was eliminated by the 1985 Agreement and Trainmen became the source of supply for promotion to Engineer. BLE argued, and presented evidence that nothing had really changed that ebb-and-flow still occurs just as it has for more than I 00 years.
The BLE argued that the crafts were separated further by the Federal Engineer's license and the penalties incurred when an Engineer was found to have violated one of the five cardinal rules.
UTU claimed that the United Air Lines NMB ruling, which found that there was one flight crew craft in the cockpit, supported its position. BLE presented language from the decision, which specifically rendered it non-applicable to the railroad industry because of the differences between the two industries. In addition, the award referenced the fact that all three members of cockpit were licensed pilots and could and did exchange duties frequently.
The BLE presented evidence in testimony and in the form of the UPRR training video for locomotive engineers, which clearly outlined that of the operating employees, only the locomotive engineer is trained, qualified and required to make locomotive daily inspections.
The UTU argued that promotion to Locomotive Engineer was mandatory for post-85 train service employees. Yet BLE argued that the evidence presented proved that promotion was anything but mandatory as it was
1 . By application
2. Involved a selection process that included criteria in addition to seniority standing
3. Included instances where non-train service personnel were chosen for promotion to the craft of engineer, when insufficient bids were received from trainmen.
4. Noted that the UTU was vague and elusive in their position as to whether junior or senior trainmen were forced to promote
5. Noted that there were instances where bulletins for classes were not totally filled when insufficient numbers of trainmen bid on the promotion vacancy.
The UTU also claimed that crewmembers always receive the same discipline. BLE presented evidence that engineers receive more discipline when the violation involved train-handling issues.
Since 1969, UTU has declined from 200.000 members to barely 70,000 by agreeing with the carriers to eliminate many positions on the train.
In 1997 the UTU tried to get Congress to change the Railway Labor Act to force a representation vote.
UTU has not been able to protect its own members, and certainly can't be counted on to protect future craft loses.
As we did with the Council of Rail Employees who defended the right of the 2000 employees on Guilford Industries to retain their separate crafts and avoid working in the craft of "Railroader" as the UTU agreed.
Defending the right of railroad employees to receive their Occupational Disabilities under the Railroad Retirement Act.
As a member of the Cooperating Rail Labor Organizations fighting to maintain the best health and welfare benefits for all railroad employees.
Stand with the rest of all Labor, except the UTU, in opposing the re-nomination of Linda Morgan to the Surface Transportation Board.
The BLE is one of the most democratic unions in the world, giving us a real voice on the job and in the union.
The BLE has taken the lead in fighting for our safety on the job, and for laws that protect our rights and our livelihood.
Each of has a personal stake in the outcome of this fight - to preserve all crafts and all jobs.