Matt Wilson General Chairman BNSF(CB&Q/GN/NP/SP&S)-MRL	Pat Williams General Chairman BNSF (ATSF)-PHL	Brotherhood of        Locomotive Engineers               and Trainmen
	Austin Morrison General Chairman BNSF (C&S/CRI&P/FWS)	Rick Gibbons General Chairman BNSF (SLSF)-MNA	IBT Rail Conference

Greg Fox                                                                                                                            August 10, 2010
Vice President of Transportation                                                                                          Re: Low hours Policy
BNSF Railway Co.                                                                                                             Sent via E-mail and USPS
P.O. Box 961030
Fort Worth, Texas 76161-0030
 
Dear Mr. Fox:

We are in receipt of the Carrier's Low Performance Discussion Points and your email to Bakersfield Local Chairman Miller. While we realize that the staffing of trains is of paramount importance, we must also caution you that the various CBA's must be respected at the same time.

Any and all time spent in the service of the Carrier must be considered as hours accredited to the employee's hour account. This includes all time on duty, and in cases of away from home terminals, all time, portal to portal, from on duty time at the home terminal until off duty time at the home terminal. Time spent away from home is time in the Carrier's service, which the Carrier controls and it must be counted towards the employee's hours. Hours credited to the employee account must also include all time spent on various extra boards or pools while awaiting service.

Similarly, all paid leave (PLD's, bereavement, vacation, etc.) must also be attributed to the employee's hour account. Since all of these earnings are paid leave earned, and qualified for, as the result of service.

Employees also must not be criticized for taking time off which is allotted to them by their CBA, to include time off for Union business. Such time includes; time lost as a result of being displaced, and time allowed for placement as a result of being displaced. The Organization bargained in good faith both in the 1996 National Agreement to reduce any displacement periods to 48 hours. Then again more recently, these four BLET Committees agreed in good faith to reduce that period to 24 hours. BNSF did not bring forth any mention or argument at that time concerning discipline being assessed regarding attendance. This policy and its application must be viewed as arbitrary and capricious and must be addressed in the most formal of venues.

Time lost due to sickness and other personal and family emergencies must also not be subject to criticism.

We have also heard that the company is disciplining employees for low hour performance for months where they are off for three weeks of vacation and laid off for one round trip previous to starting vacation. Even your availability policy allows for employees to bunch their layoffs in any 90-day period without being subjected to discipline. It is completely unreasonable to discipline an employee solely because their unpaid layoffs occurred in a month where they were taking paid time off.

In addition to the above we must also question the Carrier as to why there is nothing in writing to show the policy will be handled and what the Carrier is expecting from their employees is very puzzling to say the least. It appears to us that the local officers at each location across the entire system have "Carte Blanc" as to how they want to handle the policy with the employees at their location. The thought of this kind of handling causes us serious concerns. Without some form of guidelines for your officers as well as our members to follow leaves too much room for some to play favorites when it comes to their chosen few and certain death to those that don't make the list of the chosen. An example of how this new policy is being applied is that at least one location, the Supervisor just left your talking points in the employees' mailbox and directed him to sign it. One has to wonder how that Supervisor reported back to your Fort Worth group on the matter.

You can rest assured that we do understand the position that the Carrier feels they are in by the very few you consider to be low hour performers. In your opinion, these few individuals are not even working enough to earn the health and welfare costs that the Carrier is paying. Yet in our opinion we feel there is a lot more to the picture that is being viewed. If the Carrier is just looking at the actual hours that an employee is working without looking at the entire picture then your views are definitely out of focus.

In our collective opinion the Carrier has put the cart before the horse so to speak. We have discussion points on low hours but nothing else has been made known to any of the employees or to the General Chairmen. Before the Carrier starts disciplining individuals they feel are low hour performers it would definitely be beneficial to all involved to know what the Carrier is expecting.
You must understand, we feel you have exceeded your boundaries in not only the criteria, but in the application of this low hours performance rating, especially, when you are suggesting to the employee that a conviction of this new policy could lead straight to a Level-S of discipline without any kind of an educational process.

As is always the case, BLET is willing to try to work through our differences, especially in such a high profile issue. We stand ready to meet under the Railway Labor Act, Section(s) 2 through 6 at your earliest convenience or whenever our calendars will permit.

Respectfully,

cc:     Dennis Pierce, BLET National President
         Steve Speagle, BLET Vice President