BNSF Availability Policy gets the go ahead

BNSF Availability Policy gets the go ahead

"The BNSF has lost a lot more than they won." -- Little

"Implementation of the Availability Policy may, unfortunately,
have a long-term negative impact" -- Arbitrator

WASHINGTON, D.C. (November 2) – A federal arbitrator ruled yesterday that Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) could impose its onerous "availability policy" on operating employees immediately.

"The BNSF has lost a lot more than they won at this Public Law Board," said UTU International President Charles L. Little. "Unless they decide to do the right thing and pull back this Availability Policy as a gesture of good faith, relations between labor and management will remain poisoned for some time."

While strongly criticizing BNSF for taking this action, the arbitrator, Richard R. Kasher, said that the Work/Rest Guidelines "did not vitiate BNSF’s management prerogative to unilaterally regulate attendance through the issuance of the 1999 Availability Policy." Therefore, although BNSF agreed to abide by the Work/Rest Guidelines, it was legally free to break its word whenever it suited the carrier.

Kasher wrote in his decision that UTU International President Charles L. Little made a strong argument for holding BNSF to its agreement to abide by the Work/Rest Guideline negotiated last spring and agreed to by major railroads.

"Insofar as the ‘intent’ of the Work/Rest Guidelines/Principles are concerned," Kasher wrote, "the testimony of UTU President Little was persuasive. This Board found his testimony regarding how the UTU viewed the principles and purposes of the Work/Rest Guidelines to be compelling."

Kasher said the Board decided not to make a ruling nor issue a finding "regarding the reasonableness" of the BNSF "Availability Policy." However, Kasher wrote, "certain provisions of the Policy have the flavor of unreasonableness."

While permitting BNSF to impose its onerous "Availability Policy," Kasher said that the "implementation of the Availability Policy may, unfortunately, have a long-term negative impact upon the parties’ (unions and carrier) relationship."

Kasher criticized BNSF for doing little to work with the labor unions. "It is also clear that the BNSF expended minimal effort to work with responsible Organization representatives to fashion an arrangement which would satisfy both of these critical needs," he wrote.