Dennis Pierce General Chairman BNSF/BN Northlines/MRL 817.338.9010 |
Pat Williams |
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
BNSF Milton H.
Siegele Jr. Assistant Vice President Labor Relations |
BNSF Railway Company |
PO Box 961030 Fort Worth TX. 76161-0030 2600 Lou Menk Drive OCB Garden Level Fort Worth TX 76161-0030 Phone: 817-352-1068 Fax: 817-352-7319 |
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
Pat Williams Chairman |
GENERAL COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT |
||
Mark Banton Vice Chairman |
509 SW Wilshire Suite D |
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
Dennis R. Pierce |
GENERAL COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT |
VICE
CHAIRMEN |
|
General Chairman |
801 CHERRY ST., SUITE 1010 Unit 8 |
J.H. NELSON SECRETARY-TREASURER GALESBURG, IL 61401 |
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