Canadian Industrial Relations Board finds BLE guilty of "collaboration" with VIA Rail against union workers

Canadian Industrial Relations Board finds BLE guilty
of "collaboration" with VIA Rail against union workers

Charges of unfair labour practices against engineers union sustained;
Government says BLE openly discriminated against union members

OTTAWA and CLEVELAND (October 25) – In an unprecedented decision, the Canadian government’s Labour Board has found that the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers (BLE) engaged in "improper collaboration" with VIA Rail, the Canadian passenger rail carrier, that cost the jobs of hundreds of railroad conductors and assistant conductors.
The Board also said "the BLE failed to uphold a reasonable standard of competence in representing its members and, in this regard, is accountable to them for its shortcomings."
The decision, handed down on October 22 by the Canada Industrial Relations Board, is a major victory for the United Transportation Union (UTU), which represented the affected VIA Rail conductors and assistant conductors. The BLE, which solely represents locomotive engineers, has been attempting to "steal" the jobs of conductors in Canada and the United States.
The Board has ordered BLE to pay all legal costs, and has ordered VIA Rail and the BLE to comply with a series of measures that will give conductors and assistant conductors their rights – and possibly jobs – back. VIA Rail and BLE have been ordered to reopen the Crew Consist Adjustment Agreement in regards to selection process, seniority provisions, and the application of the Special Agreement negotiated between UTU, VIA Rail and Canadian National.
"The BLE’s bad faith collaboration with VIA Rail to steal the jobs of hundreds of conductors and assistant conductors is why we have moved so forcefully for one union to represent all of the historical rail operating crafts," said UTU International President Charles L. Little. "This decision by the Canadian Labour Board shows that we have been 100% right about our decision to push forward with our operating unity campaign in the face of the BLE’s past illegal actions."
The Board found that the "BLE’s failure to adequately and fairly balance the interests of all its members in circumstances that touched upon the very core of their employment relationship constitutes, in the Board’s view, a failure to represent the membership’s legitimate interests. This failing to assume its responsibilities with integrity and competence amount to bad faith as prohibited by the Code. The union’s behavior is tantamount to the absence of representation within the context of collective bargaining."
UTU Canada Vice President W.G. Scarrow, who testified at the hearing, said, "It’s unfortunate that it took a Labour Board decision to bring about the fair resolution of this significant issue. Had the BLE accepted the UTU’s help in the first place, it could have avoided being found guilty of ‘collaboration’ with VIA Rail and the sell-out of the historical craft of conductor."
In 1997, VIA Rail sought to eliminate the crafts of locomotive engineer and conductor and to create a new classification called "operating engineer" whose duties were to include the present duties of locomotive engineers and the greater part of the conductor’s duties. The Board ordered a representation vote in September for one union to represent the new "operating engineer" craft, and the BLE narrowly won the election. The BLE signed a "secret agreement" with VIA Rail on May 12, 1997, that discriminated against conductors and only came to light as a result of a Board hearing in April 1998.
According to the former UTU conductors and assistant conductors who filed the complaint with the Board, the BLE acted in bad faith, lied in its campaign, and discriminated against them in matters of seniority, training, flow back, and other areas in its "collaboration" with VIA Rail.
Here are some highlights of the Board’s decision:

"What these proceedings have brought to light is the BLE’s recklessness in telling conductors and assistant conductors that they would be able to return to similar positions on CN without assuring beforehand that these rights were indeed available."

"On all accounts, (BLE’s) campaign representations appear to have been based on unverified facts and assumptions, for example, that conductors and assistant conductors would obtain the similar benefits and conditions as the locomotive engineers, that they would have equal access to training and that the Special Agreement would apply."

"The complainants have been successful in establishing that the BLE was not vigilant in protecting and job seniority interests of an important part of the bargaining unit. It relied on the majority vote to justify its action, without addressing the hard core issues that affect almost half of the bargaining unit. The benefits obtained on behalf of the conductors and assistant conductors, which are for the most part directed at terminating their employment."

"Somehow, it does not make labour relations or business sense for BLE to have embarked on such a venture without a blueprint for change, a communications strategy, a support plan for displaced employees and financial objectives."

"This outcome points to an improper collaboration between the employer (VIA Rail) and the respondent union (BLE) to achieve a desired outcome for both parties at the expense of the rights of the minority and the most affected group of employees. The Board considers such collaboration as unbecoming and contrary to section 94(1) and the spirit of the Code, which prohibits such practices.

View Decision