|
 |
 |
|
| |
STRAIGHT TRACK
 |
Sunday, November 30, 2003 |
Control Chief's MU&GO
MU & Go
Control Chief's MU & Go system represents one of the latest innovations for locomotives wireless remote control operations. The MU & Go wireless remote control system consists of a unique locomotive receiver/controller (utilizing the locomotive's existing MU connector and pneumatic couplings) and either of the two transmitter styles available.
 
The MU & Go wireless remote control system provides communication ranges up to 3,500 feet and is capable of moving 135 car unit trains with road power.
For a complete brochure please click on the above picture of the MU & Go unit. You will need to download the free software for viewing and printing from the Adobe Reader link below. You may also call our Marketing Department to request a brochure be mailed to you.
And check out Control Chief's PLUG&GO:
Plug & Go™
Control Chief's Plug & Go™ locomotive wireless remote control system is comprised of a handheld transmitter, a transportable remote controller and a fixed mounted remote ready interface package. The entire system weighs less than 35lbs. With this system you have two transmitter styles available.
This product is unique to the railroad industry and has the potential to provide the most cost-effective offering on the market.
12:56:29 PM 
Google It!
|
|
|
Wednesday, November 26, 2003 |
 |
|
Craft Union Conflict Railroads Workers
The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT) are conducting merger talks. At first glance, this is not that surprising, considering that many smaller unions (like the BLE) are amalgamating into larger ones these days. Also, from an industrial union standpoint, this merger is not simply a hodgepodge amalgamation like some of late. A merger between workers in the rail industry and those in the trucking industry in theory does make some sense. These workers are all in freight transportation, after all.
However, what is curious is that when courted by the United Transportation Union (UTU), the BLE has rejected, not once, but twice in the last few years, attempts by the UTU to form a single union in the railroad operating craft. Even more curious is the fact that the UTU, while representing tens of thousands of switchmen, brakemen, and conductors who work daily alongside their engineer co-workers in the locomotive cab, the UTU represents a substantial number of engineers itself. Why, then, the failure of these two organizations to form a single union? |
12:08:01 PM
Google It!
|
|
 |
|
Rail Workers Battle Unsafe Remote Control Technology
In 2001, the Federal Railroad
 |
| Photo: Jim West | Administration (FRA), the government agency charged with overseeing safety on the nation's railroads, gave its wholesale approval for major U.S. railroads to employ remote control operators (RCOs), belt pack devices that move unmanned engines, in switching operations.
Within months, the corporate leadership of the nation's largest railroads had reached agreement with the nation's largest rail union, the United Transportation Union (UTU), for the implementation of remote control technology at rail yards across the country. By spring 2002, pilot projects were set up and the new technology began to be implemented. |
12:06:22 PM
Google It!
|
|
The latest issue of Snakebites is available now.
10:22:19 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Tuesday, November 25, 2003 |
Frederick C. Gamst
Abstract
The customary focus of internal and external investigations of human error on US railroads is the individual. For undistorted understanding of errors, and resulting accidents, we must understand the power structure in the hierarchy of levels of error. At the highest level, a state society and its culture(s) generate human errors. Below this are the errors from legislation, its executive enforcement including by regulatory agencies, and their judicial interpretations. Next, we reach the level of error from organizations, in actions and inactions of managers. At the bottom of the levels of error causation are the team and, then, the individual whose error is ordinarily not in isolation but shaped by errors on the higher levels. When supra-individual error remains uncountered, then, efforts to reduce error frequency in a workplace are largely ineffective.
Keywords: Human Error, Societal Levels, Organizations, Regulation, Railroads
8:18:28 PM
Google It!
|
|
Suit Alleging Unfair Hearing Loss Settlements for Railroad Workers Moves Closer to Trial: Efforts to Appeal by Burlington Northern, Law Firm Denied; Suit Claims Secret Agreement Swindled Workers
SEATTLE, Sep 29, 2003 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- A class-action lawsuit filed
on behalf of thousands of Northwest railroad workers with damaged hearing
recently moved several steps closer to trial when the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals denied efforts by defendants Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway
Company (NYSE: BNI) and a Portland, Ore.-based law firm to appeal key rulings.
The suit, filed in U.S. District Court on March 26, 2001, claims Burlington
Northern entered into a secret deal that facilitated easy settlements for awards
drastically smaller than those of similar claims in actual court cases. In
exchange, Burlington Northern received the Portland lawyers' cooperation and an
agreement not to take the claims of present and future clients to court, the
suit claims.
After a July 7 order granting class-action certification for the case,
Burlington Northern and the law firm Bricker Zakovics Querin Thompson & Ritchey
PC (BZQ) filed separate petitions asking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for
permission to appeal the ruling. The court denied both petitions on Sept. 15,
2003.
"Piece by piece, we're getting closer to unraveling how these settlements came
about so quickly and so easily," said Steve Berman, the attorney representing an
estimated 2,800 Burlington Northern workers. "We're encouraged by this ruling
and look forward to proving our claims in court."
The Ninth Circuit Court's rulings allowed plaintiffs' attorneys to distribute
notices to all class members and begin the process of gathering and sifting
through documents associated with class members' individual hearing loss claims.
The suit asks the federal district court to set aside releases that Burlington
Northern workers signed when BZQ settled their hearing loss claims, opening the
door for the workers to once again seek compensation for their hearing loss. The
suit also seeks return of all attorneys' fees paid by class members, estimated
to exceed $4 million.
Although railroad workers will need to again pursue their hearing loss claims if
the suit is successful, the court has already ruled that class members will keep
any money already paid by Burlington Northern.
"These workers lost a good portion of their hearing, in some cases going
completely deaf, while on the job," continued Berman. "We believe that
Burlington Northern knew this and still sought to take advantage of them through
collusive settlements."
Berman noted that class members are automatically included in the suit. A court
order changed the class from an "opt-in" class where members must sign up for
the suit before the trial, to an "opt-out" class where members are included
unless they inform the court that they do not wish to be a member of the class.
The suit, filed on behalf of workers by Berman and attorney Sim Osborn, also of
Seattle, claims Burlington Northern and BZQ conspired to settle the workers'
hearing loss claims without informing BZQ's clients that the law firm had waived
their right to a jury trial, saving Burlington Northern hundreds of millions of
dollars in claims while illegally curbing employees' rights. According to the
suit, BZQ failed to inform workers that it had agreed with Burlington Northern
not to file any lawsuits against Burlington Northern, let alone take any case to
trial, that all settlements would be capped at $65,000, and that the amounts
offered by Burlington Northern were far below similar claims decided in court.
After entering into the secret agreement with Burlington Northern, BZQ dismissed
the few cases it had filed on behalf of Burlington Northern workers, never filed
another lawsuit on behalf of any of those workers, and did not settle a single
claim for more than $65,000, the suit claims.
The complaint alleges that when one employee could not get BZQ to commit to try
his case, he hired a different lawyer and won $150,000 in a jury trial, an
amount five times what he would have received in a settlement negotiated by BZQ.
To conceal the conspiracy, BZQ and Burlington Northern refused to release
clients' files, even when those clients were not bound by confidentiality
agreements, the suit states.
BZQ specializes in representing injured railroad workers and is listed by
several railroad workers' unions as "designated council," meaning that the union
approves the firm as counsel for injured railroad workers who are union members.
According to the suit, Burlington Northern knew as early as 1966 that hearing
loss from excessive noise was an occupational hazard for railway workers, but
failed to acknowledge the issue. The suit charges that Burlington Northern did
not address the hearing-loss issue for fear of prompting employee claims. Later,
when Burlington Northern became concerned that it faced hundreds of millions of
dollars in exposure because of hearing-loss claims, it coordinated the scheme as
a way to reduce liability, the lawsuit claims.
The suit represents all Burlington Northern employees with hearing loss claims
settled on their behalf by BZQ, and whose employment with Burlington Northern
was not terminated by the settlement.
About Hagens Berman
Steve Berman is managing partner of Hagens Berman in Seattle. Recently cited as
one of the nation's top 100 attorneys by The National Law Journal, Berman is a
nationally recognized expert in class action litigation. Berman represented
Washington State, 12 other states and Puerto Rico in lawsuits against the
tobacco industry that resulted in the largest settlement in the history of
litigation. Berman also served as counsel in several other high-profile cases
including the Washington Public Power Supply litigation, which resulted in a
settlement exceeding $850 million. Other cases include litigation involving the
Exxon Valdez oil spill; Louisiana Pacific Siding; The Boeing Company; Morrison
Knudsen; Piper Jaffray; Nordstrom; Boston Chicken; and Noah's Bagels. More
information is available at www.hagens-berman.com.
Simeon Osborn is the managing partner in the law firm of Osborn & Smith, which
specializes in personal injury, aircraft litigation and civil litigation. Osborn
has more than 17 years of experience in litigation and has developed a
reputation for success. Osborn successfully represented several clients in a
recent Longview, Washington railway accident as well as actions against the Port
of Seattle in a recent shooting in the SeaTac Airport parking garage. Osborn was
selected for inclusion in the biannual Best Lawyers in America list, given the
highest rating by his peers in the Martindale-Hubbell survey, included in the
Washington Law & Politics' Super Lawyers list and listed in the Bar Registry of
Preeminent Lawyers. Osborn has argued cases to the Washington State Supreme
Court and the Washington State Court of Appeals and serves on the Western Trial
Lawyers' Board of Governors. Osborn received his law degree from University of
Puget Sound in 1984.
CONTACT: Steve Berman of Hagens Berman, +1-206-623-7292, or
steve@hagens-berman.com; or Mark Firmani of Firmani & Associates, Inc.,
+1-206-443-9357, or mark@firmani.com, for Hagens Berman.
SOURCE Hagens Berman
CONTACT: Steve Berman of Hagens Berman, +1-206-623-7292, or
steve@hagens-berman.com; or Mark Firmani of Firmani & Associates, Inc.,
+1-206-443-9357, or mark@firmani.com, for Hagens Berman
URL: http://www.hagens-berman.com
http://www.prnewswire.com
8:11:15 PM
Google It!
|
|
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1211-01.htm
Published on Wednesday, December 11, 2002 by CommonDreams.org
The Railroad Barons Are Back - And This Time They'll Finish the Job
by Thom Hartmann
The railroad barons first tried to infiltrate the halls of government in the
early years after the Civil War.
The efforts of these men, particularly Jay Gould, brought the Ulysses Grant
administration into such disrepute, as a result of what were then called
"the railroad bribery scandals," that Grant's own Republican party refused
to renominate him for the third term he wanted and ran Rutherford B. Hayes
instead. As the whitehouse.gov website says of Grant, "Looking to Congress
for direction, he seemed bewildered. One visitor to the White House noted 'a
puzzled pathos, as of a man with a problem before him of which he does not
understand the terms.'"
Although their misbehaviors with the administration and Congress were
exposed, the railroad barons of the era were successful in a coup against
the Supreme Court. One of their own was the Reporter for the Supreme Court,
and they courted Justice Stephen Field with, among other things, the
possibility of support for a presidential run. In the National Archives, we
also recently found letters from the railroads offering free trips and other
benefits to the 1886 Court's Chief Justice, Morrison R. Waite.
Waite, however, didn't give in: he refused to rule the railroad corporations
were persons in the same category as humans. Thus, the railroad barons
resorted to plan B: they got human rights for corporations inserted in the
Court Reporter's headnotes in the 1886 Santa Clara County v. Southern
Pacific Railroad case, even though the court itself (over Field's strong
objections) had chosen not to rule on the constitutionality of the
railroad's corporate claims to human rights.
And, based on the Reporter's headnotes (and ignoring the actual ruling),
subsequent Courts have expanded those human rights for corporations. These
now include the First Amendment human right of free speech (including
corporate "speech" to influence politics - something that was a felony in
most states prior to 1886), the Fourth Amendment human right to privacy (so
a chemical company has successfully sued to prevent the EPA from performing
surprise inspections - while retaining the right to perform surprise
inspections of its own employees' bodily fluids and phone conversations),
and the 14th Amendment right to live free of discrimination (using the
free-the-slaves 14th Amendment, corporations have claimed discrimination to
block local community efforts to pass "bad boy laws" or keep out predatory
retailers).
Interestingly, unions don't have these human rights. Neither do churches, or
smaller, unincorporated businesses. Nor do partnerships or civic groups.
Nor, even, do governments, be they local, state, or federal.
And, from the founding of the United States, neither did corporations.
Rights were the sole province of humans.
As the father of the Constitution, President James Madison, wrote, "There is
an evil which ought to be guarded against in the indefinite accumulation of
property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by... corporations.
The power of all corporations ought to be limited in this respect. The
growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses." It's
one of the reasons why the word "corporation" doesn't exist in the
constitution - they were to be chartered only by states, so local people
could keep a close eye on them.
Early state laws (and, later, federal anti-trust laws) forbade corporations
from owning other corporations, particularly in the media. In 1806,
President Thomas Jefferson wrote, "Our liberty depends on the freedom of the
press, and that cannot be limited without being lost." He was so strongly
opposed to corporations owning other corporations or gaining monopolies of
the media that, when the Constitution was submitted for ratification, he and
Madison proposed an 11th Amendment to the Constitution that would "ban
commercial monopolies." The Convention shot it down as unnecessary because
state laws against corporate monopolies already existed.
But corporations grew, and began to flex their muscle. Politicians who
believed in republican democracy were alarmed by the possibility of a new
feudalism, a state run by and to the benefit of powerful private interests.
President Andrew Jackson, in a speech to Congress, said, "In this point of
the case the question is distinctly presented whether the people of the
United States are to govern through representatives chosen by their unbiased
suffrages [votes] or whether the money and power of a great corporation are
to be secretly exerted to influence their judgment and control their
decisions."
And the president who followed him, Martin Van Buren, added in his annual
address to Congress: "I am more than ever convinced of the dangers to which
the free and unbiased exercise of political opinion - the only sure
foundation and safeguard of republican government - would be exposed by any
further increase of the already overgrown influence of corporate
authorities."
Even Abraham Lincoln weighed in, writing, "We may congratulate ourselves
that this cruel war is nearing its end. It has cost a vast amount of
treasure and blood. The best blood of the flower of American youth has been
freely offered upon our country's altar that the nation might live. It has
indeed been a trying hour for the Republic; but I see in the near future a
crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety
of my country.
"As a result of the war," Lincoln continued, "corporations have been
enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money
power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the
prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and
the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety than ever
before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove
groundless." Lincoln held the largest corporations - the railroads - at bay
until his assassination.
But then came the railroad barons, vastly enriched by the Civil War.
They began brining case after case before the Supreme Court, asserting that
the 14th Amendment - passed after the war to free the slaves - should also
free them.
For example, in 1873, one of the first Supreme Court rulings on the
Fourteenth Amendment, which had passed only five years earlier, involved not
slaves but the railroads. Justice Samuel F. Miller minced no words in
chastising corporations for trying to claim the rights of human beings.
The fourteenth amendment's "one pervading purpose," he wrote in the majority
opinion, "was the freedom of the slave race, the security and firm
establishment of that freedom, and the protection of the newly-made freeman
and citizen from the oppression of those who had formerly exercised
unlimited dominion over him."
But the railroad barons represented the most powerful corporations in
America, and they were incredibly tenacious. They mounted challenge after
challenge before the Court, claiming the 14th Amendment should grant them
human rights under the Bill of Rights (but not grant such rights to unions,
churches, small companies, or governments). Finally, in 1886, the Court's
reporter defied his own Chief Justice and improperly wrote a headnote that
moved corporations out of the privileges category and gave them rights - an
equal status with humans. (Last year we found the correspondence between the
two in the National Archives and put it on the web. By the time the
Reporter's headnotes were published, the Chief Justice was dead.)
On December 3, 1888, President Grover Cleveland delivered his annual address
to Congress. Apparently Cleveland had taken notice of the Santa Clara County
Supreme Court headnote, its politics, and its consequences, for he said in
his speech to the nation, delivered before a joint session of Congress: "As
we view the achievements of aggregated capital, we discover the existence of
trusts, combinations, and monopolies, while the citizen is struggling far in
the rear or is trampled to death beneath an iron heel. Corporations, which
should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of
the people, are fast becoming the people's masters."
The Founders of America were clear when they wrote the Bill of Rights that
humans had rights, and when humans got together to form any sort of group -
including corporations, churches, unions, fraternal organizations, and even
governments themselves - that those forms of human association had only
privileges which were determined and granted by the very human "We, The
People."
But, as if by magic, even though in the Santa Clara case the Supreme Court
did not rule on any constitutional issues (read the case!), the Court's
reporter rewrote the American Constitution at the behest of the railroad
barons and moved a single form of human association - corporations - from
the privileges category into the rights category. All others, to this day,
still only have privileges. But individual citizen voters must now
politically compete with corporations on an equal footing - even though a
corporation can live forever, doesn't need to breathe clean air, doesn't
fear jail, can change its citizenship in an hour, and can own others of its
own kind.
Theodore Roosevelt looked at this situation and bluntly said, in April of
1906, "Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible
government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the
people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance
between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the
statesmanship of the day."
And so now, corporate-friendly Michael Powell's FCC is moving toward lifting
the last tattered restrictions on media ownership, allowing absolute
concentration of the voices we hear into a tiny number of corporate hands.
Any day now a case involving a multinational corporation claiming the right
to deceive people in its PR - its 1st Amendment right of free speech - may
be coming before the Supreme Court. (The New York Times corporation
editorialized on December 10th that corporations must have free speech
rights: the lines are being drawn.)
As much as half the federal workforce is slated to be replaced by corporate
workers under a new Bush edict. Government (which doesn't have
constitutional human rights of privacy, and so is answerable to We, The
People) will then be able to use corporate-4th-Amendment-human-rights of
privacy to hide what those workers do and how they do it from the prying
eyes of citizens and voters. In a similar fashion, corporate-owned and thus
unaccountable-to-the-people voting machines are being installed nationwide;
in the last election these machines often produced vote results so different
from the polls that pollsters who have been successfully calling elections
for over 50 years threw up their hands and closed shop.
This administration is set to complete what the railroad barons pushed the
Grant administration to start: to take democracy and its institutions of
governance from the hands of the human citizen/voters the Founders fought
and died for, and give it to the very types of monopolistic corporations the
Founders fought against when they led the Tea Party revolt against the East
India Company in Boston Harbor in 1773.
And, in the ultimate irony, the new man in charge of economic policy as
Secretary of the Treasury will be a multi-millionaire Bush campaign
contributor, chairman of The Business Roundtable (an elite corps of 100 of
the nation's most powerful corporate CEOs), and, himself, a railroad baron.
Thom Hartmann is the author of "Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate
Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights" - www.unequalprotection.com and
www.thomhartmann.com. Permission is granted to reprint this article in print
or web media, so long as this credit is attached.
7:54:14 PM
Google It!
|
|
|
Sunday, November 23, 2003 |
In a recent letter Mr. James M. Brunkenhoefer of the UTU wrote, "You see the BLE produces a lot of rhetoric, they have bullhorns, they have rallies and they have a wonderful group of well-meaning ladies based out of St. Louis known as REQUEST. They pass around a lot of petitions and they haven't changed a damn thing."
We can only emphasize once again to all railroad employees, the importance of building alliances and presenting a united front.
Undanted by such statements, last week another wife of a UTU member was present at her husband's investigation of absenteeism. As always, this wife did her homework and was prepared with documentation to support her husband's work record... that even the attending union representatives did not have. She was able to get into the record, ONCE AGAIN that Union Pacific does not have any policy that requires any employee to work 92% of the time. They cannot produce any written documentation. And understand, this woman, like all RRESQ women, went to support the Union Representatives, not to work against them.
In addition this woman took the time to document the record of harassment by a UP officer against her husband. This harassment has taken on a personal note and is riddled with unprofessional behavior by this UP officer. Her unbiased and proficient manner of presenting the facts in a letter addressed to the UP officer's superior enabled her husband to avoid another unwarranted investigation.
Are we turning the railroad industry upside down. Of course not. But rest assurd we are out there working for fair and equitable treatment one person at a time, one service unit at a time, one Congressman at a time...people don't get involved until something strikes them personally. When they realize they CAN make a difference it really lifts their spirit and will to fight.
Inspite of feelings about RRESQ within the BLE and UTU by some leaders in Cleveland, we have been extremely successful working with both Union representatives at the local level. And we intend to continue to participate whenever and wherever we can to defend the rights of all Railroad employees.
12:00:43 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Friday, November 21, 2003 |
UTU guilty of raiding BLE on CP Railway
http://www.ble.org/pr/news/newsflash.asp?id=3843
CLEVELAND, November 21 -- An Impartial Umpire with the Canadian Labour
Congress (CLC) ruled that the United Transportation Union was guilty of
raiding BLE members in July when it encouraged BLE members to sign UTU
membership cards at the Canadian Pacific Railway.
"I have no doubt that the actions of the UTU were intended to constitute,
and in fact did constitute, a raid upon the membership of the BLE," wrote
The Honourable Alan B. Gold in his November 19 decision.
The BLE brought a raiding complaint before the CLC on July 8 following a
surprise attack by UTU representatives on the CPR property. Over the July
4 weekend, when the BLE's U.S. headquarters was closed for the
Independence Day holiday, several UTU representatives canvassed the CPR
property and requested that BLE members sign UTU membership cards.
The membership cards, however, were purposely vague in their wording and
many BLE members felt they were tricked into signing them. Later, most
signed revocation cards.
"We are pleased with the Impartial Umpire's decision," said BLE
International President Don M. Hahs. "From the very beginning, we
correctly called this UTU attack on our membership a raid, and now the
Canadian Labour Congress has agreed with us."
The Impartial Umpire agreed with BLE that the UTU's actions violated
Article IV, Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the CLC Constitution. Article IV
prohibits affiliates from organizing or attempting to represent employees
who already have an established collective bargaining relationship with
another affiliate.
He further agreed with BLE that the UTU intentionally tried to harm the
BLE's reputation in addition to trying to raid its membership.
"The evidence before me shows that the UTU acted in such a manner as to
bring the BLE into disrepute and to adversely affect its reputation," the
Umpire concluded.
The UTU's actions came at a time when the two unions were jointly
bargaining for a new contract with CPR under the auspices of the Canadian
Council of Railway Operating Unions (CCROU). The attack also came at a
time when the BLE was considering a merger with the International
Brotherhood of Teamsters, and many in the BLE viewed the UTU attack as an
attempt to derail the merger discussions. Ballots regarding a merger of
the BLE and IBT were mailed in October and election results will be
announced in early December.
However, the UTU was able to use the signed membership cards to obtain a
certification hearing before the Canadian Industrial Relations Board
(CIRB), seeking to become the single bargaining agent on behalf of both
BLE and UTU members.
The Canadian Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) conducted a hearing on
October 15, 2003, regarding UTU's request for certification at CPR. A
formal decision has not been released pending the outcome of a number of
outstanding issues.
As part of the hearing, a conductor testified that the membership wanted
the UTU to drop the foolishness of the raid on the BLE and get the CCROU
back to the bargaining table. The UTU also conceded that its own
membership cards were quite stale and out of date.
As part of his CLC decision, the Impartial Umpire noted the history of UTU
attacks on the BLE in the United States. In particular, he cited the
AFL-CIO resolution of February 26, 2002, which condemned the UTU's
constant raiding of BLE membership on U.S. railroads.
The February 26 AFL-CIO resolution stemmed from several failed raiding
attempts by UTU against the BLE, most notably on the Union Pacific
Railroad and the Kansas City Southern. In both cases, impartial AFL-CIO
umpires ruled that the UTU was guilty of raiding BLE in violation of
Article XX of the AFL-CIO constitution.
Following the November 19 CLC ruling, the UTU is now guilty of violating
"no raiding" clauses in both the CLC constitution in Canada and the
AFL-CIO constitution in the United States.
5:21:10 PM
Google It!
|
|
=======================Electronic Edition========================
. .
. RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS #780 .
. ---October 16, 2003--- .
. (Published November 13, 2003) .
. HEADLINES: .
. CHALLENGING CORPORATE "RIGHTS" .
. .
.
=================================================================
CHALLENGING CORPORATE "RIGHTS"
This week we introduce Mike Ferner (mike@poclad.org) and some new ideas
about challenging corporate rights. Mike served two
terms as an independent member of the Toledo, Ohio, City Council,
1989-93. Before that, he was an organizer for the American Federation of
State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). From 1969 to 1973 he
served in the U.S. Navy Hospital
Corps. He is one of 13 individuals who make up the Program on
Corporations, Law and Democracy (POCLAD).
>From 1970 to 1995, the environmental and labor movements in the U.S.
often focused on the failures of government to protect
human health and the environment. Today it is safe to say -- thanks to
POCLAD's work -- most of us understand that "the corporation" lies near
the heart of most major problems.
In POCLAD's view, "Giant corporations govern, even though they are
mentioned nowhere in our Constitution or Bill of Rights. So when
corporations govern, democracy is nowhere to be found.
There is something else: when people live in a culture defined by
corporate values, common sense evaporates. We stop trusting our own
eyes, ears, and feelings. Our minds become colonized. POCLAD invites you
to work with us to change this."
http://www.poclad.org
People are challenging corporate "rights" in many ways. In Pennsylvania,
attorney Tom Linzey of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund is
challenging corporate rights in court. Take a look at
http://www.celdef.org . In New Jersey, legislation has been drafted. See
http://rachel.org/library/getfile.cfm?ID=324 and
http://rachel.org/library/getfile.cfm?ID=323 In Ohio, people are making
films, writing books, and much more. See, for example,
http://www.afsc.net/corp-dem.htm
History shows us that there is no silver bullet for these deep problems.
What did it take to end slavery, gain the vote for women, and get
working people what rights they've got? Education, pamphleteering,
organizing, ballot initiatives,
marches, demonstrations, protests, strikes, creative legal work and --
yes -- civil disobedience. Hats off to POCLAD and to
Mike Ferner! --Peter Montague
CHALLENGING CORPORATE "RIGHTS"
by Mike Ferner (mike@poclad.org)
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: "The right of the
people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and
no Warrants shall issue,
but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and
particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or
things to be seized."
What has this got to do with a rail shipment of leaking radioactive
waste on its way from the Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant near Charlevoix,
Michigan to the nuclear waste dump at
Barnwell, South Carolina? Furthermore, what's it got to do with my
getting arrested recently, in Walbridge, Ohio?
When Consumer's Power Co. in Michigan had wrung all the possible profits
out of its Big Rock Point reactor, it shut it down and "decommissioned"
the 580,000-pound, stainless steel reactor vessel that had been
bombarded with radiation for over 30 years. Barnwell is the only place
in the nation that accepts
this kind of radioactive garbage, and Walbridge is on the CSX Corp. rail
line between there and Michigan.
As the train crept along its route through cities and farms, it leaked a
little radiation here and a little radiation there; none of it requested
by people or nature in its path; all of it
cumulative in its health effects. In Walbridge, it made an unscheduled
overnight stop, irradiating that village a little more than most.
Just how much radiation leaked from the shipment we'll never know, since
the only figures kept on it come from Consumer's Power Co. Even the
public's toothless lapdog, the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, can't find out without first getting permission
from the electric company. And that's where the 4th Amendment and my
arrest come in.
These days, many more people are becoming aware that over the past 100+
years, the U.S. Supreme Court has given corporations
an increasing number of Constitutional rights intended for
flesh-and-blood persons. They recognize the name for this nefarious
usurpation of our rights as "corporate personhood."
Coincidentally, it was lawyers arguing for a railroad company, Southern
Pacific Railroad, in an 1886 case against Santa Clara (Calif.) County,
who first succeeded in convincing the U.S.
Supreme Court that for purposes of the equal protection provisions of
the 14th Amendment (passed, by the way, to protect slaves freed in the
Civil War), corporations should be
considered legal "persons." With the floodgates so opened, one right
after another was extended to these aggregations of property in the
corporate form.
In 1906 (Hale v. Henkel), the Court nullified a grand jury subpoena
issued to compel tobacco companies to produce documents in a price
fixing investigation, saying it violated the companies' "rights" against
unreasonable searches and
seizures. In 1978 (in Marshall v. Barlow's Inc.), the Court said that
the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) could
not inspect the company's workplace
without first securing a search warrant.
So there we were in Walbridge, Ohio looking across 350 feet of private
property at the reactor vessel sitting in a CSX Corp. rail yard,
recording the slightly elevated readings registering
on our radiation monitors. We knew the radiation dose would increase the
closer we got to the cask, but to do so we would need permission from
the legal "person" known as CSX Corp. If
that legal fiction didn't have to let the NRC monitor it without a
warrant, it certainly wasn't going to allow me.
And isn't that the way the rule of law works? Grind up workers on the
job, bury the amber waves of grain in asphalt, irradiate the
countryside, send a generation off to war -- and by and
large, it's all legal. But try to see how much radioactive poison a rail
cask is leaking, and son, you're going to jail!
That's why I couldn't just stand there on the side of the road in
Walbridge, being a nice, law-abiding citizen. Nice, law-abiding citizens
had stood by the side of the road for the last 100 years and watched as
corporations became persons and
took 14th Amendment rights, and 4th Amendment rights, and 1st Amendment
rights -- and used them to run our society and govern our nation.
So instead, I turned to Kevin Kamps from the Nuclear Information and
Resource Service (or NIRS; see www.nirs.org and asked him if he wanted
to get arrested. He answered "yes" and attorney Terry Lodge said he'd
represent us. With monitors in hand, and carrying a banner that read
"End the Atom Age," Kevin and I strode through briars and mud towards
the train. As we suspected, our readings jumped as we got closer. But
when we reached the cask, the railroad cops were waiting with handcuffs
and hauled us away before we could get a final reading.
We will plead innocent to misdemeanor charges of criminal trespass and
demand a jury trial. We will see what our fellow citizens have to say
about the 4th Amendment, leaking nuke trains and corporate "persons."
There's a new tool we may employ in our defense, one that looks
promising for citizens who want to redefine what kind of commerce comes
to their towns. It's called the "Model Legal Brief to Eliminate
Corporate Rights." It is available on the
web at http://www.poclad.org/ModelLegalBrief.cfm and also at
http://rachel.org/library/getfile.cfm?ID=321 .
The Model Legal Brief was written by Richard Grossman, founder of the
Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy (POCLAD), Tom Linzey,
president of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund
(www.celdf.org), and Dan Brannen, a Santa Fe (N.M.) attorney. The brief
begins with a "Preface" that lets activists know right off that this is
not your grandfather's legal brief:
"This Brief is intended to assist communities organizing to challenge
the United States government's gift of constitutional
powers to property organized as corporations. Accordingly, this Brief is
NOT about corporate responsibility, corporate accountability, corporate
ethics, corporate codes of conduct,
good corporate 'citizenship,' corporate crime, corporate reform,
consumer protection, fixing regulatory agencies, or stakeholders."
In the "Summary of Argument," the brief clearly states who's supposed to
be running the show:
"...[T]he people of these United States -- the source of all governing
authority in this nation -- created governments to secure the people's
inalienable right that the many should
govern, not the few. That guarantee -- of a republican form of
government -- provides the foundation for securing people's
other inalienable rights (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness)
and vindicates the actions of people and communities seeking to secure
those rights."
One of the brief's assets is that, while it undoubtedly will inform
legal decisions to come, it also becomes a useful educational tool for
today's activists by succinctly answering
the perennial question, "How did we get into this mess?" It makes clear
how corporations are supposed to fit into U.S. society, just how they
became insubordinate, and who contributed to their delinquency at key
moments.
"Corporations are created by State governments through the chartering
process. As such, corporations are subordinate, public entities that
cannot usurp the authority that the
sovereign people have delegated to the three branches of government.
Corporations thus lack the authority to deny people's inalienable
rights, including their right to a republican form of government, and
public officials lack the
authority to empower corporations to deny those rights."
"Over the past 150 years," Grossman, Linzey and Brannen write, "the
Judiciary has 'found' corporations within the people's documents that
establish a frame of governance for this nation,
including the United States Constitution. In doing so, Courts have
illegitimately bestowed upon corporations immense constitutional powers
of the Fourteenth, First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments, and the
expansive powers afforded by the Contracts and Commerce Clauses."
It then cites chapter and verse of when and how the judiciary "found"
corporations in our governing documents. It's clear that human beings --
federal judges to be exact -- agreed over time with people generally of
their own social class --
corporate attorneys -- that greater rights should be extended to
property organized in the corporate form. I've described above how that
worked for the 4th Amendment. The brief gives
you the whole ball of wax.
The next three sentences of the Summary cut like a laser to the heart of
the problems facing us today. "Wielding those constitutional rights and
freedoms, corporations regularly and
illegitimately deny the people their inalienable rights, including their
most fundamental right to a republican form of government. Such denials
are beyond the authority of the corporation to exercise. Such denials
are also beyond the
authority of the Courts, or any other branches of government, to
confer."
And it ends with an appeal that, with enough organizing in the streets,
will once again be recognized in the courtrooms of our
land: "Accordingly, the constitutional claims asserted by the [x
corporation] against [y government] must be dismissed because those
claims deny the people's rights to life and
liberty, and their fundamental right to self-governance."
Such is our hope and our life's work.
################################################################
NOTICE
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes.
Some of this material may be copyrighted by others. We believe
we are making "fair use" of the material under Title 17, but if
you choose to use it for your own purposes, you will need to
consider "fair use" in your own case and perhaps seek reprint
permission from the copyright owner. Environmental Research
Foundation provides this electronic version of RACHEL'S
ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS free of charge even though it costs
the organization considerable time and money to produce it. We
would like to continue to provide this service free. You could
help by making a tax-deductible contribution (anything you can
afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send your
tax-deductible contribution to: Environmental Research
Foundation, P.O. Box 160, New Brunswick, NJ 08903-0160. Please
do not send credit card information via E-mail. For further
information about making tax-deductible contributions to E.R.F.
by credit card please phone us toll free at 1-888-2RACHEL, or
at (732) 828-9995, or fax us at (732) 791-4603.
--Peter Montague, Editor
################################################################
5:17:41 PM
Google It!
|
|
|
Thursday, November 20, 2003 |
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
November 14, 2003
Kesha Handy
P. O. Box 61129 Houston, TX 77208
Phone: 713/567-9335 Fax: 713/718-3390
E-Mail: usatty.txs@usdoj.gov
NEW CHARGES FILED AGAINST CURRENT AND FORMER PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED TRANSPORTATION UNION
CONTACT AUSA: Edward F. Gallagher or Richard Magness
PHONE: (713) 567-9000
(HOUSTON, TX) United States Attorney Michael Shelby announced today the return of a superseding indictment adding new charges against Byron Alford Boyd, Jr., 57, Seattle, Washington; Charles Leonard Little, 69, Leander, Texas; and John Russell Rookard, 57, Olalla, Washington. These present and former union officials, along with Ralph John Dennis, 51, Boone, Iowa, had been previously charged with racketeering conspiracy and two counts of mail fraud. The superceding indictment returned by a Houston grand jury yesterday, November 13th, includes new charges of racketeering against all three defendants and alleges 37 separate racketeering acts, seven counts of union embezzlement against Boyd and Little, three additional counts of union embezzlement against Boyd, and two counts of witness tampering against Boyd.
Ralph John Dennis, the former Director of Insurance for the UTU Insurance Association, pled guilty to racketeering conspiracy on October 3, 2003. Dennis resigned from his position with the Union this past July. The three other defendants are scheduled for a status conference before U.S. District Judge Sim Lake on December 5, 2003, at which time a trial date is expected to be set.
Boyd, currently the International President of the UTU, Little, a former International President of the UTU, and Rookard, presently the Special Assistant to UTU President Boyd, now stand charged with conspiring to violate federal mail fraud and wire fraud statutes, commercial state bribery statutes, and a union embezzlement statute by using their positions of authority as officers and employees of the United Transportation Union to solicit and collect cash payments and other things of value from attorneys doing business with the union between June 1994 and July 2003.
The United Transportation Union (UTU) is an international labor organization based in Cleveland, Ohio, with over 125,000 members consisting of railroad, bus, airline, and mass transit employees and retirees. The UTU represents its members in
collective bargaining with common carriers by railroads throughout the United States and Canada with respect to wages and other terms and conditions of employment.
Byron Boyd, who has held this position as the International President of the UTU since the resignation of former International President Charles Little in February 2001, was elected by the union membership at the UTU convention in August of this year. Little was first elected as union president in 1995 with Boyd serving as Assistant President. Little was re-elected president in 1999. John Rookard is currently employed by the UTU as Special Assistant to the President, Byron Boyd.
The indictment alleges that the defendants devised and executed a scheme to defraud and to deprive the membership of the UTU of their honest services by soliciting and receiving over $525,000 in cash from thirty-four attorneys, in Houston and around the United States, performing services for the union membership as designated legal counsel for the UTU. The Designated Legal Counsel (DLC) program for the UTU consists of approximately 50 attorneys throughout different regions of the United States who specialize in representing union rail employees whose injuries on the job result in claims against their employers. The indictment identifies the attorneys from whom bribes were solicited by number only (e.g. Attorney Number One) pursuant to Justice Department policy.
Attorneys appointed by the union president as DLC became dues-paying members of the UTU and were recommended to the union membership as the best suited attorneys to handle claims brought by injured rail employees under the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA). FELA was enacted into law by Congress in 1908 to specifically address the dangers faced by rail employees and their need to seek compensation for injuries. Unlike state workers' compensation programs, FELA places no restrictions on the types of damages that may be recovered by rail employees and no monetary limits upon the size of recoveries. Consequently, attorneys associated with FELA practices competed for the highly coveted DLC positions.
Little and Boyd had unilateral control over the appointment of attorneys as DLC and could remove attorneys from the DLC list for any reason. The indictment charges that the defendants engaged in acts of fraud, bribery, and interstate travel in aid of racketeering relating to the conduct of the union's DLC program. Specifically, by demanding thousands of dollars in secret cash contributions for Little's and Boyd's presidential campaigns, by soliciting and collecting cash from attorneys in exchange for
those attorneys being made DLC of the UTU, by soliciting and collecting cash from DLC attorneys in order for those attorneys to remain as DLC, and by using the United States mail to communicate with the DLC and other union members setting forth rules of conduct governing the DLC, including a prohibition against involvement in union politics and elections.
The new indictment also alleges the embezzlement of approximately $8,000 in union funds used to pay travel expenses incurred by Ralph Dennis related to trips he made to various attorneys for the purpose of soliciting and collecting money from them and in two instances, to warn attorneys to keep quiet about those payments. Boyd is charged with two counts of witness tampering for actions he allegedly took after a Houston grand jury began hearing testimony regarding an investigation of the UTU. Boyd is accused of sending Ralph Dennis in November 2001 to Philadelphia and to Los Angeles to warn two separate DLC to keep quite about making cash payments to Boyd and Little, including $30,000 to become DLC for the UTU.
Little, Boyd and Rookard are expected to make an initial appearance and be arraigned on the new charges before a U.S. Magistrate Judge in the near future. All remain free on bond pending trial.
If convicted, each defendant faces a maximum statutory penalty of twenty years imprisonment and $250,000 fine for the racketeering and the racketeering conspiracy; up to ten years imprisonment and $250,000 fine for each mail fraud charge; up to five years imprisonment and $250,000 fine for each union embezzlement charge; and up to ten years imprisonment and $250,000 fine for each witness tampering charge. The indictment also seeks forfeiture of $525,000 in United States currency as proceeds obtained by the defendants from their racketeering activity.
The investigation of former and current officers of the UTU was initiated in 1999 by agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Inspector General and Office of Labor Management Standards. The case will be prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Edward Gallagher and Richard Magness, Houston Organized Crime Strike Force, and Trial Attorney Vincent Falvo, U.S. Department of Justice, Organized Crime and Racketeering Section, Labor Unit.
Indictments are formal accusations of criminal conduct, not evidence. Defendants are presumed innocent unless and until convicted through due process of law.
9:43:46 PM
Google It!
|
|
|
Wednesday, November 19, 2003 |
Any Tired Hoggers or Conductors out there?
N.J. CRIMINALIZES DRIVING WHILE TIRED
BORDENTOWN, N.J. - As if staying alive were not enough of an incentive, motorists in New Jersey have another reason to make sure they are well-rested when they get behind the wheel — a first-in-the-nation law against driving while drowsy.
Under Maggie's Law, police will not be pulling over drivers whose eyelids look heavy. But the law allows prosecutors to charge a motorist with vehicular homicide, punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $100,000 fine, in the event of a deadly crash if there is evidence the accident was caused by sleepiness.
No driver has yet been charged under the law, which went into effect last month and was named for a 20-year-old college student killed in 1997 by a van driver who admitted having been up for 30 hours.
Recent studies estimate 51 percent of motorists feel drowsy behind the wheel, and about two of every 10 drivers say they have fallen asleep while driving in the past year.
New Jersey is the first state to specifically list going without sleep as a crime, according to Darrel Drobnich, a legislative analyst for the foundation. Similar bills are pending in New York and have been discussed by lawmakers in Washington state.
1:27:47 PM
Google It!
|
|
November 2003
UNION PACIFIC HITS THE BRAKES ON REMOTE CONTROL.
Union Pacific Railroad has halted its rollout of remote-control devices in rail yards until early next year because of train-crew shortages.
Employees who had been training others on the technology are needed instead to help run trains, said Robert Turner, senior vice president. Union Pacific came up short on train crews because of layoffs early this year, more retirements than expected and demands of additional business. It plans to hire nearly 5,000 people by the end of 2004. The Omaha-based railroad was about halfway through implementing the technology that moves locomotives and railcars by remote control. The 45 remaining yards will have remote control on schedule by the end of 2004, Turner said.
1:25:46 PM
Google It!
|
|
|
Tuesday, November 18, 2003 |
UTU Local Chairman responds to Brother Webb's letter being posted on RRESQ site:
The Original Email:
Please pass the word,
Thanks,
BW
And the response:
Bob,
I don't think so. While your motives are pure, your letter is being used not to gain support for wage increases but instead is being used to belittle the UTU, While I agree that there are problems that need to be addressed in our Union, I don't believe that financially crippling the General Committee is the solution.
Take a good look at the RRESQ Web Site and you will see that there is a distinct Pro BLE overtone to it. The bulk of the site deals with Remote Controls and how they should be banned. This is a BLE sentiment and issue and it is getting the hard sell at this site.
Take a look at the article on the UTU Local Chairman who supposedly signed off on an absenteeism settlement. Detect any anti-UTU sentiments there as well?
Your letter was placed on this site not to show it's merits but to garner support for more defections to the BLE. I for one will not be forwarding this to anyone.
Fraternally,
Dan Martin
Local Chairman
Legislative Representative
Local 1846, West Colton
10:14:24 AM
Google It!
|
|
Nov. 17, 2003, 12:41AM
Area briefs
More indictments against union officials
A federal grand jury has brought more indictments against two officials of the nation's largest railroad operating union. Byron Alfred Boyd Jr., 57, of Seattle, international president of the United Transportation Union, was indicted on 10 more counts of embezzlement and two counts of witness tampering. Retired President Charles Leonard Little, 69, of Leander was accused of seven more counts of embezzlement.
Boyd; Little; John Russell Rookard, 57, of Olalla, Wash., Boyd's assistant; and Ralph John Dennis, 51, of Boone, Iowa, former union director of insurance, were accused in September of seeking bribes from attorneys in return for access to union workers injured on the job.
Dennis pleaded guilty last month. The other three are free on $100,000 bail.
12:55:47 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Sunday, November 16, 2003 |
November 13, 2003
Dear Jack,
The BLE and the UTU unfortunately continue to trade members all across the United States. We are currently gaining a significant number of members on both CSX and NS. Unfortunately, we find that whether it is through age, experience or other matters, the BLE simply recruits harder at the local level. It is hard to find a BLE member who does not happen to have an application to offer membership to trainmen. They have applications available on their website, some properties even have applications printed inside of the contract and they have applications available in every publication. Quite frankly put, they appear to be the ones desperate for members. The balance between the organizations stays pretty close.
So the question gets to be asked, "Why does the membership go up and down in various locations."? A lot of that has to do with what the members at the local level believe. It seems that the UTU local leadership feel pretty free at criticizing their organization in excising their freedom of speech. The BLE exercise their freedom of speech by promoting their organization. In spite of what I have seen them do in Washington. Damn it, Railroad Retirement would have never become law if it had been up to the BLE. Remember, during the first year, they did nothing. Even though, the second year they said they were for it, they didn't bring many people like you to Washington who made a difference. They stood on the sidelines and occasionally made half-heartened efforts while we had to play the whole game. They took just as much credit. Thousands of widows and hundreds of railroaders had their pensions delayed a year and many people suffered because of the BLE's lack of efforts followed by lackluster effort. However, it appears that this did not make a difference in the field.
No other organizations have done more to relieve the fatigue situation than UTU. I will give you additional proof. We have spent the last several months in Washington dealing with Congress and the Department of Immigration to bring additional conductors here from Canada to relieve the UP manpower shortage. The BLE has not done a damn thing. The UTU has attempted to coordinate with our membership on the Alaskan railroad to bring personnel here - the BLE has not done a damn thing. The UTU has set up conference calls between the chairmen of the STB and various UP General Chairmen over nothing more than the fatigue issue. The BLE participated in none of these efforts. They didn't do a damn thing as a result of UTU 's input to the STB. The STB Chairman had dialogue with Dick Davidson and other UP officers wanting to know how UP could make such terrible manpower forecasts and told the UP to hire additional trainmen now. The BLE didn't do a damn thing. I am wrong, they did circulate applications, they did criticize UTU and they took credit for our efforts. When Roger Nober was being considered for chairmen of the STB, he called UTU - UTU talked to him and introduced him to the other unions in Washington. They set up a meeting, he came, and then before he could talk to them, they walked out. They were too busy to talk to him. I don't know what this accomplished. I am sure it made good rhetoric but the US Senate passed Roger Nober's confirmation unanimously. Their efforts didn't get one single damn vote against him. Is it any wonder that he is helping us to solve the manpower problem?
Let's look at the new partnership that BLE is building with the Teamsters (IBT). At the last IBT convention there were about 1100 delegates. At the next one, they will add 60 BLE delegates. The IBT just signed a national contact to move intermodal trailers off of the rails back onto the highways. Did they really think that their 60 or less delegates would be able to change that policy? A while ago, the UTU offered the BLE a merger. On the Board of Directors, would have been an equal number of UTU and BLE representatives. After the merger with the IBT, do you know how many BLE representatives there will be on the IBT board of directors? None. Nada. Zero. They have so little respect and appreciation for their new BLE partners that the IBT is not even making a place at the table. They did include a provision that would allow a BLE representative to attend IBT Board of Directors meetings. Wow! That is just like attending football games and movies. You get to pay and sit there and watch what is going on. But you don't get to call the plays. We have just fixed Railroad Retirement. There are many IBT pensions but some of the IBT pensions are broke. The IBT, in order to bail out their own pension fund, recently signed an 11-year freeze on their pensions. No cost of living. No nothing. And, don't forget. Just because someone is a member of the IBT does not mean they are in the IBT pension program or even get a pension. I can promise you that IBT is losing members much faster than UTU and at a higher rate. Talking about mass losses, the Northwest Airlines Flight Attendants disaffiliated from the IBT. This was 11,000 members all at one time. In 1980, of the ten largest truck lines, all of them were union. In 2003, of the ten largest truck lines, 3 are union and 7 are non-union. Although the UTU may have lost some members, I can assure you that the 50 or so largest railroads are still union. Both in 1980 and 2003. So who is going in the wrong direction? Also, the IBT suffered a loss in net worth between 2001 and 2002 of $59 million. For the year 2002, the IBT showed $85 million in assets and $144 million in liabilities.
There is only one union that the UP has beaten and that is the IBT. We understand that Mr. Davidson has a trophy room in Omaha devoted to Overnite (UP) and IBT. Overnite (UP) has 172 terminals - all of which non-union. The best IBT had done was elections at 30 of them and now they have lost those. I understand that many people are dissatisfied with results of many of the negotiated contacts. After 206 separate negotiating meetings, between IBT and UP, IBT was unable to get any contract. Nothing. Zero. Zip. IBT filed over 1,000 unfair labor practice charges against Overnite (UP) and won only five. Can you imagine any UTU general chairmen with such a record? It has never happened. Throughout the IBT Overnite (UP) strike, Overnite (UP) and its parent company, Union Pacific made money. In other words, the Teamsters call a strike to make the employer suffer and all the employer did was make money. IBT has been promising ever since the government takeover in 1988, that next year they would get out from underneath government control. They have only been wrong 15 times out of 15. In spite of their PR this year, it is doubtful that it will happen soon.
You see the BLE produces a lot of rhetoric, they have bullhorns, they have rallies and they have a wonderful group of well-meaning ladies based out of St. Louis known as REQUEST. They pass around a lot of petitions and they haven't changed a damn thing. I can't stop any member who wants to quit UTU and change unions. If they want to buy rhetoric over results (if they accept bullshit) there isn't much that I can do. We have to depend on dedicated members such as yourself in getting out the word. We have to hope that the membership can recognize the difference. The BLE and all of its rhetoric have not done anything to change the manpower situation but they have made promises and signed up members. The BLE has done little to get 60/30 but they have taken credit and signed up members. The list goes on and on. What are we doing? We are busy trying to make the lives of our members and their families better. What are we doing? We are using methods that get results. It is my belief that is our job as long as we take our members money that is what they want. Results. If railroaders want rhetoric, promises, bullhorns, demonstrations and bullshit and are prepared to pay for it with their hard-earned dollars. Then, so be it. This office has previously put out all of the information included in this email in one form or another. We have faxed it out; we have provided it via email; we have provided links to sites where this information can be found. If you have other suggestions about how we may be successful inputting out the information, please let us know. We have to depend on our local membership to carry the flag for us. Obviously every UTU member should be proud of their union because it has accomplished more than any other union in this industry. I just hope that they start bragging more about it.
Fraternally yours,
James M. Brunkenhoefer
1:22:40 AM
Google It!
|
|
Unions fire back at U.P.
By Dick Reynolds
The North Platte Telegraph
The subject of absenteeism at the Union Pacific Railroad in North Platte has numerous employees upset.
Bill Elliot, chairman of the 275-member Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers in North Platte, said that over the past six months about 55 letters of initial contact have been sent to employees in the division that runs from North Platte to South Morrill.
“They send out a letter that they need to meet with you because they feel you have an absenteeism problem, and we have told all our guys we represent they need to contact their local chairmen and we go in and collectively try to work this out,” Elliot said.
“However, Union Pacific took the stance we are going to work every weekend. They want us available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and our guys just can’t work like that.”
In an article in The Telegraph Thursday, Union Pacific public relations spokesman John Bromley said three registered letters have been sent out containing notices of investigation.
Elliot said that is correct and that is the third step in a three-step process. He said an employee is called in two times before the third letter is sent out.
“The first time we go in, we talk, they ask what the problem is and if you have medical conditions, family problems or whatever,” Elliot said.
“They tell you that you will do better or else, and if you don’t do better in 30 days they bring you in again. They tell you that you are not doing better, and the third time the notice of investigation is sent.”
There are several employees scheduled to go in next week for their second-letter conference.
Elliot speculated 90 percent of the initial contact letters would go to letters of investigation. He said they have tried to work with the company to get a work-rest cycle where employees work seven days on, and three days off.
“We had that for a while, but they elected to take that away from us,” he said.
“You know when you go to work, and when you will be off, but the way it is now you don’t know when you go to work.”
The initial contact letters say the person receiving the letter has 10 days from the date of the letter to schedule an informal conference to discuss attendance as it relates to employment as an engineer. They can have their union representative with them if they choose.
Failure to schedule the informal conference within the 10 days will result in the field manager scheduling the conference at his or her earliest convenience.
In a press release issued from Lincoln late Friday afternoon, the Nebraska Legislative Director for the United Transportation Union fired back at Bromley, challenging him to an open forum on the issue of employee availability and fatigue in the railroad industry.
Ray Lineweber said in the release, “U.P. has created their problems with some inept management decisions, causing their employees and shippers peril, while remaining in denial.”
The release states that train and engine crews are required to be available 75 percent of their time, or 126 hours a week.
Bromley told The Telegraph Thursday, “We are asking our employees to stay available on weekends and particularly through Thanksgiving holiday, because we are anticipating a heavy amount of business. It is not a demand or order that we are looking at here, but we going to urge them to do that.”
Bromley said no official memo has been sent out, but employees are being asked to be more available.
The North Platte Telegraph
621 N. Chestnut, PO Box 370, North Platte, Ne 69103-0370;
1-308-532-6000 or 1-800-753-7092; Fax: 1-308-532-9268
Privacy Statement
Questions and comments to webmaster@nptelegraph.com.
Copyright ©1999 North Platte Telegraph Online and The Associated Press.
All rights reserved. Reproduction and redistribution prohibited without permission.
12:49:46 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Saturday, November 15, 2003 |
|
Friday, November 14, 2003 |
The court order is very explicit
http://jaysworks.com/go386/11-07-03order.pdf
"ORDERED that the terms of the 2002 national agreement, which was ratified by the carriers and the UTU on August 20, 2002, is applicable to GO-386 and, pursuant to that agreement, no further § 6 notices may be served until November 6, 2004."
8:09:37 PM
Google It!
|
|
|
Thursday, November 13, 2003 |
I see Byron responded to the possible loss of members as the "defection" email has circled the globe. Got response from others loosing to the BLE. Unfortunately he did not address the Lake Erie Plan, which would have increased all members pay 75%. That seems to be the key issue UTU wants to avoid. Too bad really, because most dues paying members are expecting to see improvements in agreements instead of continuos losses. The Lake Erie Plan would have provided that plus job security. Now we don't have either one! Fred Hardin trained Charlie Little and Byron Boyd. He had a big head, thought he could take over the BLE instead of merge. Look at the results, $149 basic day. Click here: UTU: News
10:24:55 PM
Google It!
|
|
http://utu807.org/
October 6, 2003
VIA FAX AND E-MAIL
A. Terry Olin, General Director – Labor Relations
Union Pacific Railroad
1416 Dodge St - Room 323
Omaha, NE 68179
Dear Mr. Olin:
It has come to the attention of this office that Union Pacific managers on the attached list may be improperly working as trainmen and/or switchmen in the Los Angeles Hub. A review of the employees’ status indicates that all of them hold seniority in train service in other areas and are continuing to maintain and accumulate that seniority while on a leave of absence to work as company officers.
Company officers who maintain status as such and who are on officer’s leave from trainman’s seniority in other areas are not eligible to work in train service on the territory under the jurisdiction of this Committee’s collective bargaining agreement. Assignments under our jurisdiction are to be filled by trainmen or switchmen from the appropriate train service roster. The placement of officers on the train service roster does not alter the fact that they are company officers and are ineligible to fill UTU – represented assignments. Accordingly, you may consider this as notice that officers who wish to remain working as trainmen or switchmen in the Los Angeles Hub are required to sever their officer status and resign their trainman’s seniority in other areas. Additionally, such employees shall be compensated for their services as set forth in the applicable collective bargaining agreement.
We ask that you immediately inform the affected officers of the foregoing, advising this office.
Thank you.
J. Kevin Klein
UTU General Chairperson
cc: All Local Chairpersons on this Committee
Mr. Byron A. Boyd, UTU International President
Mr. David Hakey, UTU Vice President - Administration
Mr. Clint Miller, UTU General Counsel
Mr. Al Hallberg, UPRR Director, Labor Relations
All UPRR General Chairpersons
ATTACHMENT
Managers working as trainmen/switchmen in the Los Angeles Hub:
L. R. Rhoades
M. D. Faulkner
J. T. Lofton
G. D. Moran
G. N. Violett Jr.
R. L. Perry
T. A. Useldinger
D. L. Tetley
M. S. Barnum
D. A. Bader
R. T. McCarthy
S. A. Sutherland
D. R. Morrow
M. A. Guzman
R. P. Isham
C. C. Warner
R. A. Mace
3:37:18 AM
Google It!
|
|
Pens and Needles
Federal turf fights and deals mark the legacy of a union bribery case
BY GEORGE FLYNN
george.flynn@houstonpress.com
Daniel Kramer
Defense attorney Gus Saper uncovered critical evidence about union payoffs.
A case that involved millions of dollars in fraud, undercover operatives and culprits-turned-snitches could expect testimony tinged with sometimes bitter recriminations.
And that was the situation in a sentencing hearing played out in an El Paso courtroom in 2000. El Paso attorney Victor Bieganowski had been convicted of massive medical and legal fraud.
That kind of acrimony underscored the unusual twists that ultimately produced the September racketeering indictments of United Transportation Union officials for allegedly shaking down lawyers for lucrative union-endorsed business. The formal case, only in its infancy, is already revealing a lengthy probe that wound its way through colorful personalities: an acupuncturist shrink, his opportunistic lawyer brother and a former train engineer-turned-supervisor of a Houston AIDS program. Along with those were the internal clashes among prosecutors themselves competing for -- and against -- deals for informants.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1998, the good karma finally ended for the brothers Bieganowski of El Paso.
Dr. Arthur Bieganowski told of his belief in chi, the magical energy that could be unleashed in the body through his acupuncture sessions. The neurologist and psychiatrist had parlayed his pin practice into huge profits over the past decade. Evidence from his billing office in nearby Juárez showed he'd charged about $43 million and collected $31 million, primarily from federal health programs and Texas workers' comp funds, as well as private insurers.
Brother Victor conveniently maintained a law office upstairs from Arthur's clinic, and was a part of keeping the operation successful -- or too successful, in the opinion of a legion of investigators.
To penetrate the long-running scheme, two FBI agents posed as auto accident "victims" who were solicited and processed for treatments despite claiming no injuries. Reviews of clinic records showed systematic overbilling of health agencies and private insurers. A jury convicted the doctor of fraud and money laundering after an eight-week trial in 2000. He was described as blowing kisses to his friends before being sentenced to 14 years in prison and ordered to pay $23 million in restitution.
Arthur had already served about two years in custody before his sentencing, although brother Victor fared considerably better, thanks to his considerable resourcefulness. Both were indicted in 1998, and Victor had quietly pleaded guilty to fraud more than a year before Arthur's conviction. But Victor would remain free for more than four years after his indictment -- even gaining the government's permission to travel to the Cayman Islands, where the Bieganowskis had stashed millions of dollars in offshore accounts.
Some of the insight into the special handling of Victor recently surfaced in a Houston federal perjury case, a quiet precursor to the high-profile indictments of the United Transportation Union officials.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neal F. Babineaux had been out of the railroads and organized labor for about four years when he received his summons to appear before a federal grand jury in Houston in 2001.
The questioning began innocently enough, as he was asked to recount his background. The Katy-area man had gone to work for Southern Pacific in 1977, two years after graduating with a business degree from the University of Louisiana at Lafayette. He became a locomotive engineer making runs between Houston and Lafayette and gravitated into rail union activities by the early 1980s, when UTU's Local 83 elected him its chairman.
After rising through the labor ranks, he backed Charlie Little of Leander, just northeast of Austin, in his winning 1995 run for president of the international union. That took Babineaux to UTU's headquarters in the Cleveland area, but he was back home and out of the union after several months. He said the long hours and extensive travel, coupled with his wife's illness and a teenage daughter, led to the decision to quit the $66,000-a-year position as an executive staffer and return to Katy.
The nonprofit River Oaks Health Association, contractor for a HUD-funded program for homeless people with HIV, hired him as its executive director six years ago.
In the grand jury proceedings, prosecutors soon revealed their real interest: Did he know about union officials soliciting bribes from lawyers to get on their lucrative designated counsel list to represent injured workers?
"No," he replied. "And to this day I don't think it exists."
The questions became more precise: Wasn't he a go-between in funneling lawyers' payoffs to union president Little? Hadn't his wife, a title company employee, forwarded those bribe payments to him from Katy to Cleveland? No.
And didn't he once confide that he'd take his knowledge about such secret payments "to the grave"?
Babineaux's denials dug himself into only deeper problems. A sealed indictment accused him of obstructing justice by lying to grand jurors. He had been secretly recorded earlier making the disputed remarks and outlining the system of payoffs from lawyers.
And the man wearing the wire was none other than an El Paso lawyer named Victor Bieganowski.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The case against Babineaux seemed simple. A jury would only have to listen to the secret tape recordings, then to his testimony lying about ever saying such things.
But his aggressive defense attorney, Gus Saper of Houston, was soon uncovering critical information about the underlying case of payoffs by lawyers to make the union's coveted list of designated counsel.
Recordings by operative Bieganowski were extensive and detailed. In the attorney's sentencing hearing, testimony revealed that the FBI and prosecutors outfitted his Houston apartment with a camera and microphones. And his road trips as an informant took him and his wire to the union's national convention in Miami and meetings with union brass in Las Vegas, Austin and Marco Island in Florida. In fact, in his first meeting with investigators in 1999, he was so eager to cooperate that Bieganowski used his own money to buy a tape recorder -- the Miami convention was only seven days away, leaving the FBI without enough time to rig him with their sophisticated equipment.
However, Saper's defense work for Babineaux raised questions about the evidence. Transcripts of tapes did not always reflect what was said, and one of them suggested that Victor Bieganowski might have been selective about what he handed over to authorities. "Yeah, but I'm not going to give them that," he's heard to say. "Good thing I played this. Do you have another tape?"
More questions about Bieganowski's credibility -- as well as some embarrassing moments for prosecutors -- came when Saper gained access to transcripts of the informant's own sentencing session in El Paso, on his guilty plea to the charges related to the medical fraud investigation.
Debra Kanof, a blunt-spoken assistant U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas, headed that El Paso case. She clearly didn't want Bieganowski to duck a hefty punishment just because Houston investigators from the Southern District had interceded to snap him up to help on their union payoff probe.
After all, she told the court at his sentencing, Bieganowski had hindered the fraud investigation to the point where they'd cut off any talk of a deal. "I've never had a cooperator that was so manipulative," she said. "It wasn't until the trial that we found out just how manipulative and how many lies Victor Bieganowski gave to us."
That animosity was compounded when she learned that Western District prosecutors had agreed to not oppose probation for their key operative -- even though it would come in a case that wasn't theirs. Her wrath focused on Assistant U.S. Attorney Ed Gallagher, who led the union investigation and made the offer to Bieganowski. Her defendant, Kanof contended, had manipulated Gallagher, who had "meddled" in her case to the point of violating Department of Justice regulations about such deals.
Kanof added that she told his supervisors about the situation only after word of the feds' turf war reached them. "I didn't rat on him."
Gallagher dismisses the fracas as a "nonissue as far as the government is concerned" and says it was merely her opinion. "The issues of internal disagreement between two U.S. attorney's offices really are just that: internal," he says. "I don't think it is newsworthy -- it is just trash."
He attributes it to "off-the-cuff comments" made by a frustrated prosecutor, and scoffs at any claims that Bieganowski manipulated investigators. There's no indication that Kanof's remarks triggered any internal investigation, and Gallagher's reputation appears to be solid.
However, as Babineaux lawyer Saper continued to uncover more evidence of governmental infighting, prosecutors seemed to warm to the prospects of a deal. In September, Babineaux pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate in the union case in return for a $3,000 fine and two years of probation.
Saper says he believes there would have been problems with the government's case at trial, although he notes that he can't predict what the outcome would have been.
Only weeks after the plea, the U.S. Attorney's Office here announced racketeering and fraud indictments against UTU president Byron Boyd Jr. of Seattle, retired president Little and two other union staffers. They are accused of taking nearly $500,000 in bribes from lawyers. Boyd's attorney, veteran white-collar fraud specialist Bob Sussman of Houston, declined comment on his client, who remains in office while fighting the charges.
Saper's curiosity is more about those who were not charged or indicted: the scores of plaintiffs' attorneys who profited by making the payoffs to gain the union's clients.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Court documents in Babineaux's perjury case indicate that about 40 attorneys were called as grand jury witnesses, although it is unknown how many testified about being solicited for bribes or paying them.
Prosecutors in his case told U.S. District Judge Nancy Atlas about five named lawyers who were prepared to testify that Babineaux had solicited money from them or received payments. They were Robert Pierce and Lou Ramond of Pittsburgh, Joel Alexander of Birmingham, and Houston attorneys Rodney Steinburg and Tommy Ray Ledbetter.
In one filing of planned evidence for trial, prosecutors say that Babineaux asked for $25,000 from Ledbetter in 1995, as "campaign expenses" for then-president Little. "When Ledbetter refused, the defendant stated that one day Mr. Ledbetter might look around and see that he did not have as many union cases anymore," the court document states. Alexander was told to pay $15,000 and if Little was elected, he'd be on the designated counsel list.
However, Saper says it is "more than a little unusual" that attorneys called to the grand jury were all given immunity, even before investigators had inquired about their information. Those knowledgeable about the probe say the immunity grants were necessary to gain evidence against the union bosses, and such tactics are common in efforts to penetrate criminal conspiracies.
"It just seems strange to me that the people who stood to make the most money are the ones who aren't indicted," Saper says. Unlike the union officials who are threatened with prison, "the rich designated legal counsel are going home scot-free to make more millions."
Those are only some of the deals surrounding this investigation. Bieganowski testified that he invested about $200,000 of his own money and time to help the government make the union case.
Bieganowski walked away from his stormy sentencing hearing with a 30-month sentence, along with orders to pay restitution of about $375,000. In fact, he is now scheduled to be released from a prison unit by next week. Gallagher says the controversies surrounding Bieganowski are public record and fair game for cross-examination.
"I look forward to these issues being litigated," he says. "Mr. Bieganowski is a very small piece of a very large pie of evidence."
houstonpress.com | originally published: November 6, 2003
3:31:46 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Wednesday, November 12, 2003 |
TORONTO -- CEO Hunter Harrison said Tuesday (Nov. 11) that if Canadian National Railway (CN) can renegotiate its labor contracts to pay workers by the hour instead of distance traveled, it will be able to reduce its train and engine crew workforce by up to 35 per cent, according to this Canadian Press report.
Over the past year, CN won a breakthrough on the hourly-pay issue with some of its U.S. unions, affecting 1,700 employees and the Montreal-based company is currently negotiating with several unions representing operating crews in Canada.
Union contracts from the steam-engine era used to limit workers' daily travel to as little as 100 miles (160 kilometers), though that cap has frequently been raised over the years.
"Now we can get 7,000 to 7,500 miles (up to 12,000 kilometers) a month from the same employees that were producing 4,000 to 4,500 miles (up to 7,200 kilometers) a month," Harrison said Tuesday at a transportation conference.
"You can do the math and quickly tell that, over time, we can reduce the workforce -- from a train and engine room standpoint -- 30 to 35 per cent. That's very, very important," Harrison said.
His speech at the Smith Barney Citigroup was webcast from New York. Canada's largest railway now is in negotiations with seven unions in Canada representing 13,000 workers -- including 4,700 in the operating crews. The current three-year Canadian contracts expire at the end of this year.
In all of North America, CN has 22,350 employees, including white-collar workers.
Linked to the change in compensation, the new U.S. contracts drop old-time work rules that the company considered too restrictive
"We granted job security for all our employees as a result," Harrison said. "So that does put a time factor on (job cuts)."
Harrison said the changes are good for employees as well as CN.
"I'd be the first to tell you those people did not have a lot of quality of life," he said. "They made a lot of money but they were on call seven days a week, 24 hours, did not know when they were going to work.
"That makes it hard to plan for family outings, that sort of thing. Now they have assigned days off, assigned times to go to work each day. They don't have to sit by the telephone."
Will Canadian unions go along with the new system?
"I'm not sure," Harrison said. "It's 50--50. Kind of a new learning experience for us. But this initiative is the biggest breakthrough we've had for some time."
(The preceding Canadian Press report was filed Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2003.)
11:19:14 AM
Google It!
|
|
San Antonio Brother puts up website for Post85 victims of UTU's sellouts.
Brother Jones has decided to contribute to the effort to represent and motivate the Post85 brothers to take back their union. Who is getting the biggest shafting of all among rail labor? The youngheads with their lower wages and limited seniority. Who will be inheriting the union (assuming it even survives) in the next years as all the old heads retire? The youngheads. It's time they took an interest in their own affairs and in the affairs of their own union. Good luck to them.
3:56:23 AM
Google It!
|
|
Latest RCL Rumor from UPRR TCT
Rumors are running wild here, and the most popular one declares that the UPRR has reached the point where they must evaluate their RCL experiment and decide to forge ahead or retreat and cut their losses. We are told that
1. A Wall Street Journal article says that the UPRR is in the process of re-evaluating their RCL experiment.
2. The UPRR RCL Training Program has been abolished.
3. No more switchmen here will be trained and certified as RCOs.
4. No more RC equipment will be purchased.
What does all this mean, if anything? The Cattron boxes have passed their warranty period and are starting to fall apart. The GE system is rumored to be far superior to the competition, but to move to this technology would involve even more investment in equipment and training. If, indeed, there is to be no more RCL training, then that would mean that we are in an indefinite period of fucked seniority, as assignments are awarded based on the availability of RCL qualified people. Some are ready to revolt since their seniority is being taken away from them and given to those younger who are not RCL certified. Accidents, accidents, accidents. And finally, our favorite theory, that RCL in switching operations is small potatoes compared to the cost savings to be reaped by Positive Train Control and one man operations on the road. It was an interesting experiment but now let's get on to the real deal. Cutting labor costs on a massive scale by eliminating half of the train crew on over-the-road operations. Who will be the last man standing?
One of our favorite online contributors calls himself the Raggedy Assed Switchman. In the end, the dragging-ass switchman may be the last man standing in this current battle of technology vs. the workers. Anyone with an online subscription to WSJ please try to find the rumored article and post it here.
3:32:35 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Monday, November 10, 2003 |
Brothers and Sisters,
Attached to this message is a letter sent by Senators McCain and Hollings to FRA Administrator Alan Rutter making the following statement and request:
“…. because FRA only recently began collecting accident/incident information on RCLs, little data exists to judge the safety experience of this technology in the U.S. With only anecdotal information available, at least 30 communities located near RCL operations have passed resolutions and enacted local ordinances prohibiting these operations within their communities. These local laws are preempted by Federal law governing the safety of rail operations, but their passage is an indication of concern at the local level. We believe a through safety audit is warranted to help determine what, if any, concerns need to be addressed to ensure public safety.”
We should all take pride in this study being demanded by the Senate Commerce – Transportation Committee. This study was requested as a direct result of involvement of your General Committee along with the other 5 UP General Committees, many BLE State Legislative Board Chairmen, Rather than repeat the story of how this was accomplished, I would ask that you go to http://www.bleupsrgca.com/RcoCrono/RCO-Chronology.htm and read the chronology of how this effort came together. This campaign is the single best example of how unionism is supposed to work that I have seen in my 30 year railroad career. It was headed by a coalition of the 6 UP General Committees joined by various State Legislative Boards and other General Committees across the country and powered by active local Divisions with a desire to make something happen. It involved cost sharing of expenses between everyone including the BLE ID, NAR Foundation, General Committees, State Legislative Boards and many others. While each group’s contribution in itself was substantial, by pooling our resources we were able to reach goals and objectives that would not have been attainable by any one individual entity. Just as I am sure there were difficulties in coordinating the Allied invasion of Europe on D Day, we had our hurdles to leap and rivers to forge. Through those disagreements and troubles, everyone managed to “keep their eye on the prize”. We should all be proud. From the Brothers and Sisters and their family members that took the time from their busy schedules to protest and pass out information on remote technology during our demonstrations, to the member who wanted to be there but was required to work, to the members who gave presentations at city council meetings requesting the remote control bans, we should all be proud and stand tall. Through our collective efforts, we have altered the course of remote implementation. I assure you, the Carriers did not want this study to take place. You and your Union have made a difference in the outcome of this implementation of remote technology. You and your Union have successfully insured that a through study will be done evaluating the safety of RCL technology. Because of the actions of your Union Leaders and our membership, safety will be improved for all railroad employees and the general public. Please take a moment and take pride in that accomplishment.
However, understand the battle over this issue has just begun. Now that the study has been commissioned, it is imperative that we provide our Washington DC Office with all details possible regarding every remote related incident to insure a fair unbiased report. The more information we possess the better position we will be in to ensure an unbiased study. That is why we are asking everyone to keep their ear to the rail regarding any remote incidents. It is obvious that the railroads have committed financial resources to this implementation. The managers responsible for selling this technology to upper management will lie, cheat and steal to make their numbers look good. Information from the field is the only way we have of insuring that the real truth regarding the safety and productivity of RCL technology reaches the light of day. Once again, your leadership is asking for your help. Your involvement is more crucial and more powerful than any other element of this campaign. You will make the difference in success or failure. Many of you have provided valuable information in the past. I want to personally thank you for that but we have to step up our efforts. We need photos, records, car numbers, engine numbers, crew member’s names, dates, times and locations along with detailed information regarding how the incidents happened. Reporting forms and information have been distributed and are attached to this message for your use.
Brothers and Sisters, take pride in your accomplishment. Together, we have made a positive impact on the safety of all rail employees and the general public.
Congratulations.
Fraternally,
Gil Gore
General Chairman
BLE UP Southern Region
1:32:25 PM
Google It!
|
|
|
Sunday, November 09, 2003 |
An “A” card campaign.
Norman Davis
There is a regional railroad now headquartered in Sioux Falls, South Dakota called the Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern. They have been in existence since the fall of 1986. It is a sell-off of CNW track. Many of the startup employees came over from the CNW to form the original group. Things stumbled along as a non-union outfit until the UTU came on the property in 1989. The first contract was ratified in June 1990.
There is an ongoing “A” card campaign to get the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers to be our collective bargaining agent. Why you may ask? The reason is simple; the UTU doesn’t give a flip about us as individuals. They only want our money and showed little interest in us until the BLE appeared. The BLE was invited on the property early 2003. They held several meetings in Waseca, MN along with Huron and Rapid City, South Dakota with the BLE organizer Tom Miller, special representative Gene Imler and the Short line Director John Mullen. These meetings were also supplemented with local support for the Organization by workers from the DM&E along with an occasional person from another railroad including the IC&E. The BLE sent First Vice President Ed Rodzwicz along with Vice President Dale McPherson to speak to the employees on a different occasion. They held meetings across the entire system over a three day period.
What is hampering the campaign here is the UTU infrastructure on the property. They have spread so many lies and untruths about the entire “A” card campaign so as to scare some away and confuse many others. It has been rumored if the DM&E votes to go BLE we would loose our Union contract. Untrue according to the Railway Labor Act 2nd, Seventh, as amended. This is also addressed on the web site of the National Mediation Board under the FAQ portion. There is absolutely zero factual evidence to substantiate their wild claim.
There have been many different tales of how to loose our Representation completely via the voting process. Almost every version told by a UTU member was incorrect, but for some reason many younger employees believe these guys. They even believe them when they are told the truth, and offered to read it for themselves from the Representation Manual about the entire process. I have offered the name of an individual that works in Washington DC at the NMB HQ to answer questions about the process. No takers.
I am open to constructive suggestions for furthering the cause of the “A” card campaign on our property. You can also read about some of the goings on about this little tiff at the following web site: http://www.network54.com/Forum/248301. Feel free to jump in there and offer you views on things. Some use their real names while the majority use either anonymous or a fictitious handle. If you want to contact me directly I can be reached at: kb0yit@yahoo.com .
11:08:51 AM
Google It!
|
|
Brother Sims on the maladies of non-negotiation:
Brothers,
We are all faced with the maladies of non-negotiation by our own senior
international officers. It seems that as we go along that we are always going for
the grass on the other side. In the interim the senior officers are blocking
our way to the grass on the side that we currently occupy. No matter that the
grass is turning with the latter day negotiations. We are faced with a decision
to all to concur that we need a better way to negotiate.
It is our time to go forth and elect the younger and more willing to fight
officers within our own ranks. It seems that the older more "experienced"
officers at the international lever have figured out a way to "NON-Negotiate" our
own contracts on a national level.
It doesn't matter what union we belong to we need to get in some new blood.
The need to protect ourselves in a seniority level is ridiculous. No more
leaving out of the later hires. No more of percentages. No more of leaving a craft
to fight another for the right of operation of an engine. Let's stick
together. That is what the companies don't want to happen. In the past years we have
been able to work around our differences. We will always have differences. Let
us not let them be our own death bell ringing to the tune of "Happy Days Are
Here Again" for the companies.
I propose common walkouts. We should have our own blue flues and also have
our own stay at home because of not being "physically rested" "Unsafe to
operate" with the rest afforded after a stretch of twenty or more days in the cab
without a break. IT is time that we are able to mandate more hours of rest and
not "service." I remember being from the farm and being in "service" meant a
lot more than able to be in the seat.
We are a group of over stressed and over worked and not compensated people.
We have good pay but not the type that we deserve for having to put up with the
hours that we put in to get what we get. We should all work together and see
about getting split service requirements. I have friends that work afternoons
for ten days and then evenings for the same and then days. Why can't we go and
do the same. All we have to do is be available to the trains. IF we do this
in fifteen day shifts we can at least get out biological clocks in a rhythm
after a time.
People, it is time not to let the railroads deal us the slow death that we
get out of working till retirement. How many of us really get to enjoy our
retirement. IT is our duty to ourselves and the future people coming into the
railroad to change this as soon as possible. Maybe you will consider me another
whiner but if you look into what we are looking in the future we need a drastic
change. Have a voice in this, do it properly, don't let it go by?
I love the railroad as a job. I don't like the hours and don't like the
constant being on an "electronic Umbilical cord" but it comes with the territory.
Don't call for assignments, call for call brackets and call for more time off
after a certain amount of days off.
Call for overtime on the road and meals and all the arbitraries. We can't
have the old ones but if we are creative and intelligent, we can have all the
compensation that we had before. No one ever told me that cash meant Assets, now
I know that there are more than one way to skin a cat. I suppose you in the
genre of the rails in general know what I am talking about. It doesn't have to
be extra engines, call it consist total or usable axles, plus extra. If you
have a train for 3,000 horsepower and have three engines you have 6 usable axles
and 12 extra. Any extra are having to be inspected and you are responsible for
them, get paid for it. To hell with tons on drivers, old school now you have
to have a different term.
Read this closely and think about all the items that we have lost and think
of ways that we can have them back. That is a "unified" effort. If we ever to
survive this century we are going to have to have all of the unions separate
and together at the same time. I don't believe in merging crafts that in the
long run by being able to be apart they actually help each other. We need to have
our solidarity but also our anonymity. Never force a merger when you can
force a cause by being stronger with two instead of one. Be very careful and
continue on with the fight. We are able to win if we finally put our prejudices
away at the union lever and plan together how to do what we need.
Good Day Brothers and never give up. Always be on the vigilant side and
always believe in each other as that is all we have now. Protect the younger people
as they will protect you in your later years and retirement. We need each
other to make this work. Never give up, always remember that we all work for a
common cause. Don't scream merger, scream bloody murder for equal representation
and compensation. Stand together and there will never be a stronger force in
the face of labor. Together working in the strength of solidarity we can win.
Stay True To Each Other
Alan R. Sims
BLE 494
St. Paul
Candian Pacific Railroad
11:05:02 AM
Google It!
|
|
BLE critical of Amtrak Board nominee
CLEVELAND, November 6 -- International President Don M. Hahs said today that the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers is surprised over the United Transportation Union’s endorsement of Louis Thompson, a pro-privatization nominee to Amtrak’s Board of Directors.
Of the three men nominated to fill vacancies on Amtrak’s Board, Thompson is perhaps the Bush Administration’s most pro-privatization candidate. He is an economist who serves as the World Bank’s top railway advisor.
“Considering the Bush Administration’s apparent plan to privatize Amtrak, it was expected that the Administration would try to ‘stack the deck’ and fill the vacancies on Amtrak’s Board of Directors with nominees who show the President’s ideology,” President Hahs said. “It was expected, but nonetheless disappointing.”
Thompson has authored 14 publications on the privatization of railways, including titles such as “Best Methods of Railway Restructuring and Privatization,” “The Benefits of Separating Rail Infrastructure from Operation,” and “Reforming and Privatizing Poland’s Road Freight Industry.”
In England, many of Thompson’s theories were put to the test as that country privatized its national rail system. Unfortunately, for British rail workers and passengers, the privatization was not successful.
“The disastrous privatization experience of British Rail provides an important precedent,” according to Columbia University economist Elliot Sclar in “Amtrak Privatization: The Route to Failure.” “There the breakup of the system was followed by serious accidents, financial insolvency, and further public subsidies (even while private investors were provided returns on their participation). Here privatization yielded the worst of both worlds -- chronic service failures, no effective market discipline, and wasted public revenues.”
(For more details, see Sclar’s report at the Economic Policy Institute’s website, http://www.epinet.org).
The UTU endorsed the pro-privatization Thompson in an October 30 letter from UTU National Legislative Director James Brunkenhoefer to Senator Conrad Burns.
In its letter of endorsement, the UTU cites Thompson’s extensive background on railroad issues, dating back to 1970 when he served as one of Amtrak’s creators.
“While it may be true that Thompson has a significant background in the railroad industry, the entire focus of his career has been privatization,” President Hahs said.
Amtrak has 23,000 employees, and its dismantling and/or privatization would create widespread job losses for railroad workers and could potentially cripple the Railroad Retirement system.
“Given the fact that all of Rail Labor would suffer under the privatization of Amtrak, one must ask why any Rail Labor organization would endorse a candidate for Amtrak’s Board of Directors who has such a strong pro-privatization background,” President Hahs said. “Nevertheless, this is exactly what the UTU has done.”
A copy of the UTU’s letter endorsing Thompson is available on the BLE website at:
http://www.ble.org/pr/pdf/utu.pdf
10:28:21 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Saturday, November 08, 2003 |
BMWE NEWS RELEASE
October 27, 2003
Poll indicates BMWE support for BMWE/Teamster merger
1:20:40 PM
Google It!
|
|
| Health-care agreement ratified |
| CLEVELAND – United Transportation Union members have ratified a new health-care insurance plan, locking in improved benefits at lower costs than any other rail union has achieved.
The agreement, affecting almost 43,000 UTU members employed by most of the nation’s major railroads, plus numerous short lines, was ratified by 60 percent of those who voted. Votes were counted and reported by the American Arbitration Association, which conducted the entire voting process. |
|
|
| November 6, 2003 |
12:38:36 PM
Google It!
|
|
CLEVELAND, October 31 -- The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers has reached a landmark contract agreement with the Texas-Mexican Railway that allows for the safe implementation of remote control operations and provides major pay raises.
"It's a good agreement," said BLE Tex-Mex General Chairman George Leyendecker. "There's nothing like it in the land."
12:08:01 PM
Google It!
|
|
Brother Bob Webb comments on the mass defection of post-85ers from the UTU to the BLE&T of the Teamsters Union:
November 4, 2003
UTU Local 240, C&T
Harry J. Garvin III, Local Chairman
7365 Carnelian, Suite 227
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701
Hi Harry,
This is an update regarding the mass movement, exceeding 100 in Los Angeles of post-'85 UTU members defecting into the new BLE&T Division of the Teamsters Union. They anticipate passage of the current BLE/IBT merger vote, noting that BMWE has also made preliminary inquiries to merge into the Teamsters as well.
The group has expressed dissatisfaction with the UTU in swelling numbers, it seems mostly around the lack of road overtime, particularly on runs where they expire on the hours of service with absolutely no additional pay. They fault the UTU for not correcting this with future "Trip Rates" and cite the Las Vegas-Yermo example; a $206 Trip Rate for 171 mile run, with overtime not occurring until after 10' 43." It is feared that this will be reflective of our future Trip Rates as well. Also mentioned repeatedly is the national overtime rate (when rarely experienced) that is lower than straight time for most heavy equipment operators.
More regarding overtime; One of the leaders of the movement states that everyone in his Brakeman's class is divorced, primarily because the railroad requires them to work nights, weekends and holidays away from their families for straight time, and..."the UTU hasn't ever done anything about it, why not give the Teamsters a chance? How many Teamsters work more than 8 hours, weekends or holidays without overtime or a night differential?"
They cite the recent 14% pay raise obtained by TCU, BRS and Amtrak compared to our 12% raise under the 2002 Agreement and state that RCO paid for the increased post-'85 deadhead under Trip Rates which will result in zero overall increased cost to the carrier. Also concerning Health and Welfare $100 month CO-pay, 3% GWI "push-back" and half of future COLA givebacks, they have committed to stay in the UTU long enough to vote NO on the proposal because "compared to the clerks, were already paid up."
Copies of former BLE President John Sytsma's letter to Fred Hardin in 1984 detailing the Lake Erie Plan are being circulated. Highlighted in the letter was BLE's offer to run Engineer and CO-Engineer (from the ranks of UTU Conductor's) without Firemen, Brakemen or caboose for new business at 175% of the current pay rate, including all miles. The plan eliminated arbitraries except ITD and FTD which would begin after 30" for all. It provided protection for Brakemen by attrition.
This was an effort (rebuked by the UTU) to head off the oncoming disaster which became the 1985 Agreement. The group is well aware of the discrimination against post-'85 that eliminated future arbitraries, productivity payments, etc., and that those pro-funds denied them what eventually amounted to 33% of our pay on the SP. They determine if the UTU had found a way to agree to the Lake Erie Plan, possibly by merging with the BLE early on instead of trying to take it over, we would all be making 75% more right now, plus all Conductor's would have the skill of operating the locomotive, especially of concern in the light of future PTC operations. They are concerned about the UTU's inability to protect from future engineer only operations.
They resent the UTU encouraging them to support UP/SP merger implementing and hub agreements that protected the larger earnings of pre-'85 employees, while sacrificing $50 a day in reduced crew and meal allowances, plus 65 miles in off-assignment penalty and run-arounds. They feel that only because of these and other wage losses are the railroads willing to pay pre-'85 employees much higher wage protection (which includes pro-fund earnings) on the backs of extremely lower wages for post-'85. They know pre-'85 will eventually all be gone, leaving the UP with a windfall, again because of UTU agreements.
The list goes on.... "UTU condones UP officer borrow-outs to cover manpower shortage created by railroad." Recognizing the high percentage of furloughed employees that did not return when recalled, the defecting group blames this on our national agreement pay rate and road overtime rules. Also that future "Trip Rates" will eliminate extra earnings for "step up" pay during manpower shortages. Again, a future loss as a result of a UTU agreement.
The inability to tie up for sufficient rest and family time without penalty to guarantee or other earnings protection is a huge issue. Even after being away for several days at a time, train crews can be called back on duty in 8-10 hours at home terminals. They feel the UTU failed to accomplish anything to increase their quality of life in the latest agreement. In fact, now they will have to work more to pay Health and Welfare contributions. They have grown impatient as more and more members end up in divorce court with children who do not know their dads. They see no end to this and can find no reason to be encouraged by the UTU in the future.
These are the major complaints, earnings and time away from home. They feel insult is added to injury when asked to pay more for medical in the middle of an agreement and loose disability insurance as well. I don't know if that was the straw that broke the camels back, because the overtime issue has been brewing for years. I do know they realize what we've been doing obviously hasn't worked and can at least get some satisfaction by taking action of some sort of change via the Teamsters in a "what have we got to loose" fashion. All can tell you is to expect a loss of members, because they are a determined, disgusted and bitter bunch.
I have suggested that they call the General Chairman's office and voice their concerns. But I can't promise them Kevin will get the UP to pay us more, even though one might think a little more overtime could be less expensive than a continuos training expense. I also cannot argue with others doing the same job as me, risking life and limb, spending just as much time, if not more away from their families for half the pay.
I don't know how much satisfaction post-'85 will get from the Teamsters, only time will tell. But they state the obvious, that railroad operating employee's earning ability has been devastated over the period the UTU has been in existence. It's also very apparent to all of us that the fighting between the unions to retain a diminishing number of members has cost us a fortune in wages. Many are completely fed up with those results.
Please feel free to forward this. I will send it to our General Committee and International after I hear from you as they both have expressed appropriate concern for issues in Los Angeles.
Bob Webb, Local 240
Los Angeles
11:57:30 AM
Google It!
|
|
Brother Bryan Lewis answers an RCO's question about links between Box use and abdominal pain:
Canac Belt Packs:
I was particularly concerned about the electro-magnetic pulses eminating from the boxes and from the units given the incidence of cancer tumors in users of older mobile phones and those living in the vicinity of high-tension power lines, ( I am aware that there is no scientific link established medically, but business has a vested interest in maintaining that disconnect). In the Federal Beltpack regulations, there is a small reference to the issue and it is dismissed and referred to the Volpe Center for monitoring, (CFR 02/14/01; volume 66; number 31; page 10342). I feel like a laboratory rat out there and with exposures ranging form 50 to 60 hours a week, I am wondering when my first abdominal tumor will show up.
Anyway, to date, the major problem with wearing beltpacks is the back and neck strain. It is not an acute problem but one that is definitely accumulative. I have been lucky on occasion to be called off my regular RCO job for extra running with an engineer and the absence of the vest and beltpack is a noted and welcome relief to my upper back, (spinal area between and just below the shoulder blades) and lower neck vertebrae that results in an ache. It is more of an annoyance than anything else, but what will be the cumulative effect, I wonder?
Brian Lewis
UPRR - Oakland, CA
11:54:43 AM
Google It!
|
|
From the Federal Railroad Administration website: Of particular interest is an item found at the bottom of the document under New Developments which has the FRA changing position once again on the matter of Remote Control Operators operating while riding moving equipment.
RCL-Questions and Answers
RCL Operations Under FRA Regulations
New Developments:
Riding Cars - After reviewing RCL operations for over a year, FRA is taking the position that RCO’s who are operating the RCL, regardless of the technology used, should not ride on the side-moving equipment under any circumstances. This does not include locomotive or caboose steps or platforms.
Main Track RCL Operations - The Notice of Safety Advisory 2001-01 was written to address the use of RCL technology in “switching” operations only. If this technology is used for “train” operations on the main track, FRA has several immediate concerns that need to be addressed before this occurs:
1. The current RCO training programs on file with FRA are not adequate for train operations. FRA would expect RCO’s to receive the same training on the basic fundamentals of train operations as any other locomotive engineer. This would entail significantly more classroom and on-the-job training. A new training program would have to be developed and submitted to FRA for approval.
2. The current technology may not be sufficient to conduct train operations. This technology was designed for yard switching operations and basically controls movements by the independent brake. This would be inappropriate for train movements.
3. FRA believes railroads would have to develop instructions and procedures to govern these operations. For example, RCO’s should be required to be located in the cab of the locomotive, out of harms way, while operating from point A to point B. The RCO’s should be in a position to observe air gages and other monitors during these operations.
8:13:20 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Friday, November 07, 2003 |
Here is Canadian Brother Greg Gordon's classic report on the introduction of RCLs in the Kamloops Yard:
Switching by Wire:
A report on the implementation of
Locomotive Control Systems (Belt Pack)
technology in Kamloops Yard, British
Columbia
by Greg Gordon
Introduction:
Reliable computer assisted technologies are a fact of everyday life. Radio, communication, food preparation,
entertainment, personal transport and medical life support systems all require the successful involvement of
computers. Some applications of computer technology, like air and space flight, require a high degree of
effective and reliable computer support without which such endeavours would not be possible.
In December, 1995, C.N. Rail introduced computer assisted, remote controlled locomotive control system (LCS)
to its rail yard operations in Kamloops, British Columbia. The introduction of this technology has allowed the
railway to further reduce the yard crew from three members (locomotive engineer, yard conductor and assistant
yard conductor) to two (yard conductor and assistant yard conductor) allowing the railway savings in labour and
other expenses.
This report attempts to summarize operating shortfalls, dangers and employee concerns filed with the United
Transportation Union (UTU) in regards to the implementation and operation of LCS technology in Kamloops
Yard.
11:10:21 PM
Google It!
|
|
© Copyright 2005 The Usual Suspect.
Last update: 5/25/2005; 4:24:25 PM.
|
|
|
