Dennis Pierce General Chairman BNSF/BN Northlines/MRL 817.338.9010	Pat Williams General Chairman BNSF/ATSF 817.426.9003	Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen
	Austin Morrison General Chairman BNSF/FWD.JTD.C&S 806.358.9025	Rick Gibbons General Chairman C&S BNSF/SLSF.MNA 4 17.887.5 267	IBT Rail Conference

 Mr. John Fleps                                                                                                                                    April 26, 2006
Vice President Labor Relations                                                                                                             Re: Remote Control Recertification
The BNSF Railway Company
Post Office Box 961030
Fort Worth, Texas 76161-0030


Dear Mr. Fleps:

The collective BLET GC's met in OKC on April 5, 2006 to discuss issues that concern each of us on our respective properties. One of the issues that concerns us all is Mr. Siegele's January 19, 2006 response to General Chairman Pierce concerning "Remote Control Recertification", That letter was written in response to Chairman Pierce's complaint of November 19, 2005. Chairman Williams also wrote to Mr. Siegele on December 1, 2005 confirming the position taken in Chairman Pierce's letter.

In his January 19, 2006 reply, Mr. Siegele committed that, "Under these circumstances, no engineer will be required to recertify in remote control operations while working as an engineer". On the surface, it would appear that Mr. Siegele has acquiesced to BLET's position that those in the engineers quota, working under BLET Collective Bargaining Agreements, will not be forced to recertify in a class of service currently represented by another union. However, it appears that this commitment is qualified on the notion that BNSF's submission to FRA now "provides that an employee certified as an engineer is equally certified in remote control operations". Mr. Siegele also goes on to suggest that BNSF has started a new program for 2006 where recertification as a train service engineers automatically recertifies an employee as a remote control operator. This last suggestion is totally contrary to the commitment we seek. We would again request that you take immediate steps to cease any and all requirements that force an employee working under BLET CBA's to recertify in what is currently a demoted capacity if he or she does not desire to maintain that level of certification.

FRA regulations do not require train service engineers to be certified as remote control operators, nor does the regulation require any employee to maintain remote control certification in order to remain certified as a train service engineer. Those who do not recertify as remote control operators may loose the ability to work as remote control operators, but there is no other connection to their certification as train service engineers, nor can their rights to be certified and work as train service engineers be affected if they choose not to recertify in a demoted capacity. We would remind you that when remote control operations were first implemented, engineers who were obviously going to be demoted following implementation were not allowed to train or certify as remote control operators due to the fact that they were working under BLET CBA's.

Even after being demoted following implementation, demoted engineers at some locations were forced to wait until the Carrier saw fit to offer additional training for remote control operators before they were ever allowed to certify in that capacity. All things considered, we are more than a little surprised that the Carrier now suggests that actions taken to certify or re certify as a train service engineer somehow carry over to include certification or re certification as a remote control operator. We must reiterate, BNSF is without the right to require an engineer working under BLET CBA's to recertify as remote control operators against their will. Accordingly, we would ask that you clarify the instructions in Mr. Siegele's letter, on the surface they appear to be quite contradictory.

Before you reply to our request, we would also suggest that you review the Carrier submission to FRA on Engineer Certification. We have attached the Sections from the Carrier's October 1, 2005 Submission to FRA concerning remote control operations in so far as initial certification and re certification are concerned. You will note that both initial certification and re certification require hands on operation of remote control devices. BNSF's current certification and recertification program for train service engineers includes no such requirement. While Mr. Siegele animates that certification and re certification as a train service engineer automatically carry remote control certification along with it, the Carrier's submission to FRA indicates otherwise. With remote control training being the concern that it is to both BLET and UTU, we are not certain as to why Mr. Siegele would suggest that remote control operators can be initially certified or re certified having never handled remote control equipment as is required in the Carrier's submission to FRA. We are hopeful that this suggestion is an oversight that you can repair, we await your prompt response.

Sincerely,

/s/ A Morrison                                        /s/ DR Pierce
BLET General Chairman                         BLET General Chairman

/s/ P Williams                                          /s/ R Gibbons
BLET General Chairman                         BLET General Chairman

cc:                                 Don Hahs, BLET National President
                                     All Local Chairmen, BNSF
                                     UTU General Chairmen, BNSF
                                     Milton Siegele, BNSF
                                     Randy Luther, BNSF

Mr. D. R Pierce
BEET General Chairman
801 Cherry Street, Suite 1010
Ft. Worth TX 76101                                                                                                          File: Remote Control Re-certification

January 19, 2006

Mr. Pierce:

Refer to your November 28, 2005 letter requesting new instructions be issued to the field concerning the remote control recertification of employees working as engineers.

Our Overland Park Training Center recently notified us that there are no plans to recertify for remote control operation any employee currently working as engineer. Our submission to the FRA provides that an employee certified as an engineer is equally certified in remote control operation. In 2006. our recertification plan provides that any employee due remote control recertification will be recertified as an engineer so that all employees will be recertified for all classes of service on a single three year recertification time line.

Under these circumstances, no engineer will be required to recertify in remote control operation while working as an engineer.

I believe this addresses the issue you raised in you November 28, 2005 letter. Please let me know if we need to discuss this matter further.

Sincerely,
/s/ Milton H. Siegele, jr.
 

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers & Trainmen

                                                                                                                                                        December 1, 2005
                                                                                                                                                        1135-RCO
Mr. Milton Siegele. Jr. ATP - Labor Relations BNSF Railway
P.O. Box 961030
Ft, Worth. TX. 76160-0030

Dear Mr. Siegele -
The purpose of this letter is in response to General Chainman Pierce's letter of November 20 wherein he discussed the position of his office regarding the Remote Control Operations recertification of promoted engineers.

It is the position of this office, just as that of General Chairman Pierce that engineers who are working in promoted status in positions covered by the BLET's Collective Bargaining Agreement should not be required to recertify to a job that would provide for their working in demoted status. These jobs are in fact switchman's positions represented by the UTU and are not the responsibility of employees working in the engineer's quota.

While we too are open to discussing future voluntary recertification by BLET represented employees, we request by copy of this letter that the appropriate instructions be sent to the field operations personnel reflecting the position of this office regarding this issue.

Sincerely,

/s/ Patrick S. Williams
General Chairman
Santa Fe Committee

PJW/meb

cc:                     Don Hahs - BLET National President
                         Steve Speagle - BLET Vice President, BNSF property
                         BLET General Chairmen - BNSF Committee
                        All Local Chairmen - Santa Fe Committee
                        Gene Shire - General Director, BNSF Labor Relations

 

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers & Trainmen

M. H. Siegele
AVP/BNSF                                                                                                                                  November 28, 2005
2600 Lou Menk Drive                                                                                                                   File: Remote Control Re-Certification
P.0. Box 961030
Fort Worth. TX 76161-0030


Dear Mr. Siegele

This is in reference to our recent conference on November 14, 2005 where we discussed BNSF's ongoing program for re-certification of remote control operators. Specifically, we discussed application of the Carrier's "RCO" re-certification requirements, if any, to those operating employees who are promoted as engineers and are currently working under BLET Collective Bargaining Agreements. As we discussed, this Committee has been given written assurances in the past that engineers will not be called or required to work in demoted crafts whale assigned in the engineer's quota. As remote control operations are currently assigned to the craft of switchmen only, requiring those in the engineer's quota to re-certify as remote control operators is not a promotional responsibility. Rather, it would require engineers to perform service in a demoted craft. Accordingly. and as we advised. we do not see that any promoted engineer should be forced to re-certify as a remote control operator while assigned in the engineer's quota.

We are aware that you are discussing application of the Carrier's remote control operator re-certification program with UTU, and our position concerning those working under BLET Collective Bargaining Agreements is not intended to have any affect on those employees working under UTU Collective Bargaining Agreements. While UTU may represent the ground men who operate remote control equipment, application. of UTU Agreements and understandings governing the work rights and requirements for their remote control operators do not apply to those employees assigned as engineers. This position should not be foreign to UTU when one considers that UTU would not allow any engineer who was deemed to be `'demoted" to participate in BLET's 2005/2006 Flexible Spending Account offering or our 2005 Disability Insurance offering, solely because they were deemed to be working under UTU's collective bargaining agreement.

Would you please re-issue current field instructions, removing those who are working under BLET Agreements from any required re certification as remote control operators on the portion of the BNSF property represented by this Committee? We are willing to discuss voluntary re-certification for those who wish to keep their certificates current, please advise this office as soon as possible if you would like to arrange a time and place. to meet and further discuss these issues.

Sincerely,
/s/ Dennis R. Pierce
General Chairman

cc:                 Don Hahs, National President. BLET
                     BLET General Chairmen, BNSF
                     BLET Local Chairmen
                     Randy Luther, BNSF General Director, LR
                     Roger Boldra, BNSF, Director, LR