CLEVELAND, November 30 - In yet another example of public relations misinformation, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers ("BLE") has put out a release about the Job Benefit Fund of the United Transportation Union ("UTU"), in its continuing battle with UTU's efforts to provide better representation of railroad operating employees on the nation's Class I carriers.

The truth is the UTU's Job Benefit Fund was created in 1962 to provide benefits to members who paid voluntary assessments when they were disciplined or dismissed by their employers. UTU has fully reported the JBF in its LM-2 reports to the Department of Labor ("DOL") every year since then. In fact, DOL performed a complete audit of UTU in 1987 and said nothing about JBF. UTU's CPA's from Ernst & Young have audited UTU every year since 1962 and have said nothing about the JBF being subject to ERISA. Additionally, UTU has fully disclosed in its LM-2 reports to DOL the loans from JBF to pay the legal liability from cases that started back in the 1960's and 1970's and for its educational motor coach. UTU obtained an outside legal opinion in 1995, which said the Job Benefit Fund was not subject to ERISA before it made the loans. "UTU's books were fully opened to BLE during its merger discussions with UTU, and they said nothing until it became politically expedient for Ed Dubroski and others to welsh on the deal to merge with UTU, a deal they never wanted," said UTU International President Charles L. Little.

"Poor Clarence Monin had been targeted for recall and removal as BLE President by the Dubroski gang, and the poor guy used the late-concocted theory of his lawyers that JBF was subject to ERISA to break off the merger in May of 1999," said Little. UTU went to DOL to seek advice about that question in May of 1999. Almost a year and a half later, DOL advised that in its opinion JBF is covered by ERISA. "UTU disagrees, and so does the expert it retained before the DOL, former Secretary of Labor Ray Marshall. Right now UTU is talking to DOL about compliance, and it does not expect any adverse financial impact in the end," Little said.

Little also said, "We provided full information to all of our Officers, General Chairpersons and State Legislative Directors about the Department of Labor's ruling at the time we received it late last month." "In that communication, we indicated our intention to litigate on the basis of the case law because someone who has been disciplined or discharged is not 'unemployed' since that term does not mean simply 'not working', " Little explained. "At this point, we are reserving judgment on litigation since we are in good faith discussions with the Department of Labor about resolution of this issue," Little added.

"It became clear that BLE intended to use any adverse ruling from DOL in any representation election that would be ordered by the National Mediation Board ("NMB") among the operating employees of the Union Pacific because the BLE lawyers wrote to the DOL at the beginning of the year to obtain UTU's request for an opinion, and said BLE needed the information because the ruling of the arbitration panel appointed by the NMB was coming up soon," Little stated. "BLE has got the situation at the NMB wrong too, because the Board has yet to act upon UTU's request for reconsideration of the NMB's adoption of the erroneous panel determination in the Union Pacific case, which is directly at odds with the Board's own ruling in the Texas Mexican Railway case issued a day later," Little said.  "In fact, the same issue is currently pending before the NMB in the Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis case, and we expect a ruling there any time now," Little added.

Finally, Little said that BLE's promotion to its members for Brotherhood's Relief and Compensation Fund ("BRCF") in its magazine and otherwise, including payments BRCF makes to BLE for those magazine advertisements, might well mean that under a DOL regulation BLE is subject to ERISA with regard to that fund.