Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers

                    May 4, 2000                                                                                           File: Guaranteed Extra Boards

Dear Sirs and Brothers:

This letter is regarding the carrier’s latest endeavor of decimating our extra boards in an effort to control guarantee costs. When the guaranteed extra board agreement was negotiated in 1994 the carrier knew and accepted that some guarantee costs would be associated with this agreement. That Was the cost the carrier incurred in obtaining what it had historically wanted; unilateral control of extra board staffing.

The cost to this organization in accepting this agreement and obtaining substantial guarantees was that we gave up the contractual controls we had regarding extra board staffing. The avenues we now have in forcing the carrier to add engineers to existing extra boards is extremely limited to say the least.

The agreement provided that if the average earnings of engineers assigned to an extra board exceeded the amount set forth in the agreement, we could request that additional engineers be assigned. Subsequent to the signing of the agreement, due to the fact that it was near impossible for local chairmen to obtain engineer earnings, an understanding was reached that converted the dollar value of the guarantee to an equivalent mileage factor (2400 miles per half).

Further, language in the agreement provided that the carrier would staff these extra boards with a sufficient number of engineers which would allow reasonable lay-offs. At this point in time the reasonable language has never been clearly defined.

This office does not have to tell you that the latest round of extra board adjustments have reduced our extra board staffing, at most locations, to unparalleled lows.

Now comes the difficult question, what can we do to get our extra boards increased to what we consider acceptable levels?

First, as previously stated, if it can be shown that the average miles for engineers assigned to an extra board exceeds 2400 miles per half, we have contract language that can be utilized to get additional engineers placed to those respective extra boards. In determining these miles, I want you to include all miles made by emergency engineers (engineers on rest days, demoted engineers, etc).

Second, as a few of the other divisions have been providing, we will need the percentage of engineer vacancies filled at your location by emergency engineers, including pool engineers stepped up out of turn. You may do this on a weekly, bi-monthly or monthly basis.

Third, we will need the average dwell time (time off between calls for service) of the engineers assigned to your extra boards.

Fourth, we will need the number of engineers assigned to your respective extra boards and the number of assignments your extra boards protect.

Fifth, we need documentation of engineers who are being denied lay-offs account insufficient engineers assigned to the extra board. We have done this in the past and we will need to do so again. We need specific documentation; dates, times, who denied request, recent past lay-off history of the denied engineer, etc.

We are requesting the past work history of engineers who have been denied lay-off requests account, as previously stated, that the reasonable lay-off language has yet to be fully defined and we do not want to take a case to the carrier in which the lay-off practices of a particular engineer could impair our case.

I understand that this entails a lot of work on your behalf, but it is imperative that this office be provided this vital information if we are to have any chance of convincing the carrier or very possibly a neutral that our extra boards are not being properly staffed. Depending on the information provided, we will determine which is the best venue to attack this issue. Whether that is in the collective bargaining arena, the safety/fatigue arena or both. This is a very important issue for our all of our engineers; those assigned to the extra boards, those engineers who are being denied reasonable lay-offs and our demoted engineers who are being put in a very untenable position of not knowing when or in what service they may be called to work.

Last but not least you need to be aware that the carrier has broached the subject of returning control of the extra boards to the organization, the price obviously being a major reduction in guarantee amounts. Further, we are in the midst of contract negotiations and it is obvious pressures are being applied. A few local chairmen have contacted this office and stated that it may be time to seriously look at our guaranteed board situation. Feedback on this issue would be appreciated.

As always, I remain,

Fraternally yours

M.W. Geiger Jr.

General Chairman

All Locomotive Engineers

Most of the documentation is already being kept. What this committee needs is documentation from each of you as far as having been refused a reasonable layoff request. Please take the time to write down the pertinent information and leave it with this committee. This is the only way we can make the carrier toe the line regarding lay-offs.

Fraternally,

Richard E. Etienne

local chairman Div. 758
Vancouver WA.