UTU leads struggle against BNSF Availability Policy

UTU leads struggle against BNSF Availability Policy

There they go again … BLE fundamentally misunderstands arbitration process
“BLE provided a weak ‘me-too’ position in arbitration, and its General
Chairman’s letter indicating his agreement with the
policy almost wiped us out.”-- Little

CLEVELAND (November 4) – The United Transportation Union (UTU) agrees with the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers (BLE) on one thing about the BNSF Availability Policy – and that is the UTU will continue to oppose it until BNSF drops it or negotiates a new one.

“It was UTU that got the LaTourette Bill (H.R. 3091) introduced, and it now has 38 co-sponsors, including significant Republican support,” said UTU International President Charles L. Little. “We got this bill introduced to stop carriers like BNSF from imposing 19^th century labor practices on union members. We’re glad that the rest of rail labor, including the ‘me-too’ BLE, once again followed our initiative and are backing this bill.”

H.R. 3091 would amend the Hours of Service Act to provide operating employees on or subject to duty for seven consecutive days could not be forced to work or be subject to duty for three consecutive days thereafter.

“UTU will also continue to work through the Federal Railroad Administration on this problem,” Little said.

Little said that BLE’s November 3 press release about the arbitration award of Richard Kasher on BNSF’s Availability Policy shows that union’s “ignorance of the arbitration process.”

“The BLE press release shows the true ignorance current BLE leadership has about the arbitration process,” said Little. “BLE used the press release as a smokescreen for its General Chairman who had essentially agreed with the Availability Policy in a letter the carrier presented as evidence to help make its case at the arbitration hearing.”

Little said that early on in the arbitration process over the BNSF Availability Policy, UTU General Chairpersons correctly determined that it was not the right time to put their agreement provisions at issue.

“Unlike the BLE’s inexperienced President,” said Little, “I was present at the hearing and offered testimony. The UTU did not present any ‘testimony’ that harmed the BLE’s ill-advised efforts to raise their own agreement provisions in arbitration. The BLE just didn’t know what it was doing, which shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone.”

Kasher wrote in his decision that 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.”

Little said that Kasher “stated the plain facts of the arbitration process, namely, that agreement provisions were not ripe for consideration because the policy had not been implemented and no claims about the agreements had been handled.”

“What was clearly at issue was the Work/Rest Guidelines/Principles,” said Little, “and the arbitrator found that BNSF ‘egregiously’ violated their spirit. He relied almost exclusively on UTU testimony and evidence. As usual, BLE provided a weak ‘me-too’ position in arbitration, and its General Chairman’s letter indicating his agreement with the policy almost wiped us out.”

On Monday, Kasher, the federal arbitrator, ruled that Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) could impose its onerous “availability policy” on operating employees immediately.

The BNSF Availability Policy could force some employees to work up to 360 hours per month, or 30 twelve-hour days. The policy allows these employees only one day off per month, which may be denied by BNSF for any reason. If the employee then takes time off due to fatigue, the employee is subject to discipline.

“BNSF has lost a lot more than they won at this Public Law Board,” Little said Monday. “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, 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.