VICE CHAIRMEN

VICE CHAIRMEN    M. W. GEIGER, JR.    SECRETARY-TREASURER
D. R. PIERCE   GENERAL CHAIRMAN   J. H. NELSON
S. J. BRATKA 4237 ORCHARD DRIVE
K. E. DeVINE     GALESBURG, IL 61401

BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS

GENERAL COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
BNSF/MRL

190 EAST 5TH STREET, SUITE 105 TEL (651) 224-5441
Serving Since 1863 ST PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101-1637 FAX(651) 224-3132

May 5, 1999 File: Emergency Engineers

M.O. Wilson Mike Elliot
Local Chairman Member
BLE Division 104 BLE Division 104
Spokane, WA 99208 Spokane, WA 99209

Dear Sirs and Brothers:

This is in response to your letters dated March 14, 1999 and February 20, 1999, respectively, regarding the proper usage of demoted engineers and the inherent problems associated therewith.

First to Brother Elliot, Section 22. (a) - Standing Rules of the Constitution and Bylaws of the International Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers prevents me from responding, either verbally or in writing, to a member of the Division regarding grievances when a ruling is requested that involves the interests of other members. Having since received a letter from Local Chairman Wilson, I will presume that this question comes from the Division and will, therefore, respond.

That said, your question is, "what constitutes an emergency, as defined by Schedule Rule and Agreements, which would require the use of a demoted engineer to fill a vacancy when the engineers extra board is exhausted?" You have also sought a definition from the Federal Railroad Administration regarding this question. The term emergency, under the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and the Hours of Service Law, is not one and the same. We are talking apples and oranges.

The Hours of Service Law specifically lists and defines emergencies which would allow the carrier to require operating crews to work in excess of twelve hours without violation.

Emergency, under the Collective Bargaining Agreement is an entirely different matter. Our Schedule Rules and Agreements require the use of demoted engineers when the extra board is exhausted. Some of our locations require that other engineers within the quota be used prior to getting to the demoted engineer (decision tables) depending on the requirements of that particular schedule. But no matter which former road, ultimately, engineer vacancies that cannot be filled by the extra board or other means will be protected by a demoted engineer.

In many locations if the - engineers' extra board is exhausted, the senior demoted engineer will be
called for the service first and foremost. Great Northern Schedule Rule 69(a), page 80 specifically requires:

Ø "When engineers' extra board becomes exhausted, the oldest available qualified demoted engineer will be called for emergency service as engineer."

In the context of the above language, the framers of this agreement defined and agreed to what constitutes emergency service for demoted engineers. There is no dispute between the parties regarding this interpretation.

The practice of using demoted engineers when the engineers' quota is exhausted is well established in the industry. This issue has been to arbitration many times and those decisions have further entrenched this practice. In one such decision known as the Bullpen Award, which involved firemen, the Neutral found that the main purpose of a demoted engineer was to stand ready to be used as an engineer when needed, like a relief pitcher in the bullpen. When called upon that was the demoted engineer's responsibility, to fill engineer vacancies. This is just one award of many that has addressed this issue and came to the same conclusion.

Therefore, as there is no dispute between this Organization and the Carrier regarding the use of demoted engineers to fill vacancies when the engineers' extra board is exhausted, there would be no claims or grievances to progress to arbitration under the Railway Labor Act as conveyed in your letter.

That is not to say that there are indeed problems associated with this practice that need to be addressed. Guaranteed extra boards have had a major effect on the staffing of our boards. Prior to guaranteed boards the Division had much more control over board staffing and if demoted engineers were being used on a consistent basis the Organization had the ability to increase the number of engineers on the extra board. The trade off for guaranteed boards was that the Carrier gained control of extra board staffing. Recently, the Carrier has given us assurances that if we can show that demoted engineers are being used routinely at a particular location, the staffing of that board will be closely scrutinized. The Carrier concurs that the board is not properly staffed if demoted engineers are being used regularly to supplement the engineers' extra board. That is not to say that the Carrier is going to agree to add to the extra board when demoted engineers are being used predominately on weekends, since we only allow extra board adjustments once a week. Rest day extra boards have compounded the problem.

It is also quite apparent that certain criterion needs to be established when using demoted engineers in emergency service. A demoted engineer who is assigned in other service needs to have advance knowledge of upcoming engineer vacancies which cannot be filled from the engineers' quota. The Carrier cannot expect an individual to be properly rested for this service without having advance knowledge of the vacancy. One cannot be expected to be rested twenty four hours a day. It is my opinion that the carrier needs to provide this information on a regular basis throughout the day.

If the Carrier fails to provide this necessary information, a demoted engineer should not be held responsible for a call that he did not have advance knowledge of A demoted engineer should not be penalized for not accepting a call for emergency engineer service when advance notification was not provided. I believe we can address these issues and make this situation much more palatable for all involved.

But this Office does not hold the contract for the conductors, brakemen's or switchmen's extra boards. It is the position of this Office that the use of engineers, whether while in the quota or while demoted, falls solely under the jurisdiction of this Committee. That position will not change. But, we are more than willing to work in conjunction the UTU General Committees to address this most important concern. Further, the supplementation of extra boards involves more than just demoted engineers. It involves all operating craft extra boards as the carrier moves closer and closer to the common extra board which it desires. By copying this letter to the appropriate UTU General Chairmen this will serve as my commitment to work with the UTU in an attempt to address this problem.

I would like to address this issue with the System SACP Council and with the Fatigue Countermeasures Group with the concurrence of the UTU General Chairmen.

This issue has come up at other locations so I will take the liberty to copy this response to all BNSF Local Chairmen, I want to thank you both for your letters and concerns. I hope this answers your questions and I will keep you appraised of our efforts in this area. Hoping this provides the necessary information, I remain,

Fraternally your

M.W. Geiger

General Chairman

cc: J.D. Fitzgerald, GC/UTU
C.M. Vahldick, GC/UTU
K.W. Mason, GC/UTU
D.B. Snyder, GC/UTU J.W. Filter, Assc. GC/UTU
All Local Chairmen, BNSF Northlines