The Usual Suspect: STRAIGHT TRACK

New URL for Straight Track

Thu, 09 Jun 2005 19:24:34 GMT

If you have arrived here looking for the Straight Track blog, please redirect yourself to

www.straighttrack.org

which should be much easier to type and to remember.

Rail Operating Crafts United Update

Thu, 09 Jun 2005 17:28:42 GMT

It's been a little over a month since Rail Operating Crafts United (ROCU) went public with their appeal to operating rail workers to unite, and so far the response has been overwhelming. It appears that yardmen, trainmen, engineers, yardmasters, bus drivers, and airline pilots are all able to see how self-defeating the ongoing UTU/BLET war is. Instead of fighting ourselves for dues dollars for the union elite, we should be united in our fight against those who really want to do us harm, our bosses.

Now we don't blame the bosses for doing everything in their power to wring the maximum production out of us at the least cost to them. But we can fault our union leaders and fellow working rails for falling into the divide-and-conquer trap that they have set for us. Experience teaches us that when disaster strikes, people band together with family, neighbors and friends. Rail workers are in the middle of a long disaster and they are starting to realize that their natural allies are their co-workers. Not politicians in Washington. Not union leaders in Cleveland. But their union officers serving closest to them and the sisters and brothers that they work with every day. Your co-workers are rising to the occasion. They hope you will join them.

Here is the latest ROCU contact info:

www.rocutoday.com
rocutoday@gmail.com

312-924-1437

P.O. Box 1053

Salem, IL 62881

ROCU needs your support at all levels. If you only wish to be added to the growing list of ROCU supporters, call, email or visit the website and indicate that you publicly support the cause of unity. If you wish to participate, download, print and distribute ROCU info from the website. Talk to your sisters and brothers about ROCU's goals. If you wish to help financially, make your check out to ROCU and send it to the P.O. Box. If you want to be a co-conspirator, request to be added to the email list where you will become a part of the exciting process of crafting a true rank-and-file caucus and perhaps a democratic merger of two unions. If you are really POed, request information about joining the weekly conference call. Become a part of history. Join ROCU.

TCU Merger in the works, along with UTU?

Wed, 08 Jun 2005 20:39:20 GMT

Here is an intriguing article in the June issue of Labor Notes that interviews Phil Amadon, reform slate president of a TCU local, who describes the current merger possibilities (Teamsters, SEIU, CWA) and implicates UTU in a merger deal. By July?

Rail Unions Still Outside the Teamsters Debate Joining

A Chance for One Big Rail Union?

by Stephanie Stern

Mergers have pushed 42 percent of the unionized workforce on the railroads in the United States into the Teamsters (IBT). The mergers of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and the Brotherhood of Mainenance of Way Employees into the Teamsters in 2004 led to the formation of a new Rail Conference inside the IBT. The remaining 58 percent of railworkers are struggling to decide when, why, and whether their unions should follow suit.

Phil Amadon, a newly elected reform slate president of a Transportation Communications International Union (TCU) local covering five states and seven cities, believes that his unon ought to merge with the Teamsters. While the TCU is a broad Rail union that includes office professionals, technicians, service workers, and yardworkers, Amadon's Cincinnati-based local builds and maintains freight and Amtrak passenger cars.

MERGER AS OPPORTUNITY

After nearly 30 years of experience as a car mechanic on the rails, Amadon believes a merger is a unique opportunity to promote democracy within his union. "A lot of carmen that I have spoken with beilieve there is mass corruption within the TCU," Amadon said. "Merger would allow for a direct election of leaders that the TCU currently does not have . . . and lead to greater accountability."

Amadon also believes having the TCU inside the Teamsters would increase the political clout of the reform caucus Teamsters for a Democratic Union.

Amadon says workers he's in touch with are most concerned about contracting out of work to nonunon shops: "Hundreds of mechanics and car-building jobs are moving overseas. The largest car-building shop recently moved to Mexico, where railworkers make between $1 and $3 an hour.

"The largest car repair shop in Cincinnati is a nonunion shop, and the nonunion Toyota plant up the road has workers laying down under rail cars for $8-9 an hour. Some contractors are even working right on the grounds of union shops, and the bleeding keeps getting worse."

Recalls Amadon, "When I first started 30 years ago, one contractor was going to lay linoleum in a car and everyone walked out. Now we have people working on our bread and butter and nothing is happening." Amadon says that declining membership has forced carmen to make concessions on issues including self-help, crew fatigue, safety inspections, and job loss.

MERGER DANCE

Amadon says that while TCU officials have kept quiet about merging, he has heard talk of a possible merger with either the Service Employees (SEIU) or the Communication Workers (CWA) by July. He speculates that the deal would include the United Transportation Union (one of the larger unions representing rail and transit workers) merging with whatever union TCU decides to go with.

In the last two years, UTU members have seen their top officers indicted in a corruption scandal, as well as the loss of 4,000 UTU members on the Canadian Pacific Railway to the Teamsters. According to Amadon, the UTU sees a merger with the TCU as an avenue back into the AFL-CIO.

"The majority of members that I have talked with support the BLET (Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, the Teamsters' division)," says Amadon. But while many TCUers want a merger, those opposed, including International President Robert Scardeletti, maintain that a large union that includes competing industries will be unsympathetic to their issues, resulting in more contracting out and givebacks on health insurance.

It remains to be seen whether there will be unity on the rails driven by reform. Although he supports the move, Amadon is certain a merger under the Teamsters will bring in its own set of issues. But, he believes, TCU members "should not pass up the chance to form one big transportation union. Even if you don't want to give Hoffa kudos, (the idea) really fires people up."

Past Reflections on Current Affairs

Wed, 08 Jun 2005 14:58:34 GMT

In a repost of a 2003 article from the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, UTU's controversial minister of propaganda, Frank Wilner, is accused by the guys at The Rail Forum of ignoring the present and dredging up old news from the past in order to put the Teamsters in a bad light during the current insanity of A-Carding and petitioning for single class of service. As bad as the Teamsters were and probably still are, we think they have a point. And to make their point they bring up some history of their own. Like this quote of Wilner on crew consist:

"Minimum crew size is an albatross for all major railroads. Generally, as many as four workers-most often three-are assigned to each train, when no more than two-sometimes, one are necessary."

-Frank N. Wilner (AAR/UTU) 1991

And this bit of UTU RICO history implicating currently sitting UTU International Officers in the same criminal activities that sent Little and Boyd to jail.

Former United Transportation Union Presidents Charlie Little and Byron Boyd have implicated current UTU President Paul Thompson, Secretary/Treasurer Dan Johnson, and UTU Vice Presidents David Hakey and Malcolm Futhey in a racketeering scandal that has rocked the union over the last year.

THE REST

Please keep this in mind when evaluating Roger Griffeth's UTU reform efforts and ROCU's efforts to democratically unite the warring rail operating unions.

Teamsters seek Legislative Relief for Ailing Pensions

Wed, 08 Jun 2005 05:44:25 GMT

Teamsters pressing for shoring up of pension funds. LabourStart headline - Source: Pittsburgh Tribune-Review [US labour news from LabourStart]

Pennsylvania Teamsters are looking to Washington to get a little relief for pension plans that have been hit hard by the recent Bear Market.

Teamsters pressing for pension laws

By Thomas Olson
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Tuesday, June 7, 2005

HERSHEY -- The president of the Pennsylvania Teamsters said Monday that legislation to shore up big pension funds could be introduced in Congress as early as this week.

"Our major issue right now is our pensions," said Frank Gillen, at the International Brotherhood of Teamsters' Pennsylvania Conference annual meeting here.
"We've worked hard all our lives -- some members over 30 years. And we have to make sure that they're secure," Gillen said.

Rails would surely say the same thing, and with all the allegations flying around about the Teamsters having their eye on Railroad Retirement funds, it is encouraging to read that

"We are not asking the government for any givebacks or one dime," he said.

Rather, the union is pressing for federal laws that would enable big pensions -- or multi-employer plans such as those operated by the Teamsters -- to extend the time to make adjustments to pension fund balances. Such accounting changes would smooth out the effects of wide swings in the market over time, similar to changes made last year to single-employer pension accounting.
"This would save lots of plans," from technical insolvency, Gillen said.

And it couldn't hurt that the Pennsylvania Teamsters seem to be pretty busy organizing.

"We organize everything right now," Gillen said. "In Pittsburgh, we're organizing police officers and dispatchers." Philadelphia Teamsters are busier organizing factory workers, truck drivers and warehousers, he said.
The Teamsters recently won a labor dispute regarding efforts to organize truck drivers at FedEx Ground. The National Labor Relations Board ruled that the Teamsters could try to organize the drivers for the Moon-based company. FedEx had challenged those efforts by arguing that labor issues at FedEx, which uses air cargo transportation, fell under the Railway Labor Act.
Organizing is much easier under the National Labor Relations Act because it only requires a majority of votes from workers who cast a vote, but the federal Railway Labor Act requires that a majority of all member of the bargaining unit choose union representation.

Herman Benson on Stern/Sweeney and Union Democracy

Tue, 07 Jun 2005 23:16:10 GMT

The Association for Union Democracy's (AUD) Herman Benson blogs about labor's crisis in his piece UNION DEMOCRACY AND THE WHITE WORKING CLASS IN LABOR'S GREAT DEBATE.

" . . . one thing is clear: debate about the most optimal structure for the labor movement in the years ahead has already made the issue of union democracy central." Joseph A. McCartin in Dissent, Winter 2005.

Benson refines our previous charge, that both Sweeney and Stern are minimizing the importance of union democracy in "unionizing the organized." He says Stern "disparages those who talk about union democracy." On the other hand he claims the AFL-CIO administration team informs him that

"He [Sweeney] insisted that any and all ideas and proposals be guided by three basic principles." And here is the first, the very first, principle: "Respect for the democratic rights of union members."

It's just that after committing in principle to union democracy, Sweeney fails to submit even one proposal that would strengthen it.

NS A-Card Website

Tue, 07 Jun 2005 14:43:48 GMT

Here is a website put up by someone to provide information about the ongoing NS A-card campaign. They describe their mission as:

Welcome to the BLET NS A-Card Website
This website was created to distribute facts concerning the A-Card Movement on the Norfolk Southern. As such, you will find News, Information, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ's), and Letters from General Chairmen, Local Chairmen, and Union Members such as yourself. Dates of meetings and other events will also be posted. We are also hosting a Discussion Forum where you can go to discuss any topic relating to the A-Card Movement. Feel free to ask any questions or state your opinion!

Harry Kelber on AFL-CIO reform and Andy Stern

Mon, 06 Jun 2005 23:25:36 GMT

The Labor Educator's Harry Kelber analyzes and critiques both John Sweeney's and Andy Stern's plans to redesign AFL-CIO and save labor from further decline. They both seem to come up short, especially in the area of union democracy.

10 Issues on Labor's Future (June 6, 2005)

Will Reshaping the AFL-CIO Boost Power
Of Leaders or Serve Needs of Members?

By Harry Kelber
(Fourth in a series of 10 articles)

It is a sad fact that very few union members are interested in--or even know--the proposals by AFL-CIO President John Sweeney and Service Employees President Andy Stern to restructure the labor movement.Very little effort has been made to inform and involve them about issues that can determine their living standards and economic future.

Everything is now in the hands of a few national labor leaders who have until now failed to come up with policies and programs to revive the ailing labor movement and give American workers the prospect of a brighter future. Can they convince us they have finally found winning solutions to our problems?

Let's examine Stern's restructuring proposal, because it has been widely publicized and has become a principal point of debate. Stern reiterates what we all know is true: "Today, global corporations threaten American jobs, families and the hopes of future generations. The middle class is shrinking, health care is becoming unaffordable and guaranteed pensions are disappearing, yet corporate profits are booming and the rich are richer than at any time in history."

So what does Stern propose to do about all this? His prime proposal is to merge the AFL-CIO's 57 international unions into some 15 to 20 "mega unions," each responsible for organizing a particular sector of the American economy.

There are no details about how the forced mergers would take place, what would happen to those unions that were left out of the selected "mega unions," or how long it would take to achieve the desired goal or what would happen in the meantime. Nor is there any certainty of success, even with the infusion of lots of money. Some critics have called Stern's plan a rearrangement of the deck chairs of the Titanic as it heads toward the iceberg.

From the perspective of the rank-and-file, whom Stern completely leaves out of the restructuring process, there are more direct concerns. Will they be allowed to vote on whether to approve or reject a merger of their union with another? What happens in a forced merger to the wage standards, working conditions and benefits in their current collective bargaining contracts? What rights will they have in a forced merger?   Will too much power be controlled by the officers of the "mega-unions," so they won't be accessible or accountable to their members?

*   *   *   *   *

In "Winning for Working Families," Sweeney says, "Our ability to create good jobs, ensure working families health care and retirement security, defeat unfair trade agreements and improve and protect progressive public policies depends on effective, people-powered mobilization at the local, state and national level." Sweeney has sung pretty much the same song for the past nine years, yet has been unable to achieve any of these goals.

Sweeney is full of "we must's", but hardly any "how to's". On page 5 of his major policy document, he says: "We must better communicate who we are and what we stand for with actions as well as words. We must integrate strategies for meeting the challenges of the global economy into every aspect of our work. We must help workers form unions in new ways. We must expand our outreach in many directions, from forming campus coalitions to working more effectively with community allies."

Who is Sweeney kidding? Who does he expect will carry out this list of assignments, and how are they to do it? That's not Sweeney's problem. He's given us "guidance."

For years, Sweeney's fondness for bureaucratic jargon and overloaded sentences in his pronouncements on the AFL-CIO Web site has been promoted as insightful, strategic leadership, but it is mostly bunkum that most labor activists have stopped reading or listening to long ago.

Sweeney, unlike Stern, favors voluntary mergers of unions, "especially those with common core jurisdictions." He wants to keep all 57 international unions within the House of Labor by offering their leaders inducements to win their support, while Stern proposes to do what it takes to streamline the AFL-CIO into no more than 20 huge unions. Sweeney also says he would "identify" tens of thousands of local union coordinators to lead worksite education and mobilization.

*   *   *   *   *
A clique of international union presidents in both the Sweeney and Stern camps are in agreement that they are going to run the AFL-CIO, just as in the past, and freeze out everyone else.

James Hoffa, president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and a key figure in the Stern faction, proposes: "The 25 unions of the Executive Committee [composed entirely of international union presidents] is untenable. If 10 is too small, then let it be the top 15 and no more."

And nine international union presidents in the Sweeney camp have issued a joint document that says the "Executive Committee should be composed of the Presidents of the largest affiliates."

Since the presidents of the 15 largest AFL-CIO unions are all white, middle-aged or elderly males, except for one African-American (Bill Burrus of the Postal Workers), it means that women, who represent about 43% of the total AFL-CIO membership. will have no voice in national policy decisions that impact on their lives. Neither will Hispanic union members.    African-Americans were lucky to have one representative on the proposed Executive Committee, because the Postal Workers barely made it to the top 15 largest unions.
Since the leaders of the big internationals have decided that only they can hold national office, qualified leaders and members from the state federations and central labor councils are permanently barred from seeking seats on the Executive Committee, which will become the real power within the AFL-CIO.

The top leadership of the Federation will continue to be frozen, as it has been for years. There will be no point to holding elections, since only the heads of the biggest unions will be automatically entitled to hold national policy-making positions indefinitely, even if they perform poorly.

*   *   *   *   *.
Neither Sweeney nor Stern are unwilling to restructure the undemocratic way the AFL-CIO convention elects its three top officers and the 51 members of the Executive Council. They love the process, because it enables them to get re-elected again and again without opposition or debate in a sham ritual that lasts no more than five minutes. Here is how it works:
Article IV, Section 4 of the AFL-CIO Constitution permits international unions to cast as many votes at conventions as they have members, based on their per capita payments to the Federation, while State Federations and Central Labor Councils are each limited to a single vote.

Thus, a small international union like the Federation of Professional Athletes, with 1,700 members, can cast nearly three times the votes of all 50 State Federations and 600 Central Labor Councils combined.

This absurd, archaic voting system has to be revised so that each delegate has one--and only one--vote. That principle of equity and fairness in voting is applied at conventions of the Canadian Labour Congress, to which many U.S. internationals are affiliated and abide by its voting rules. In most organizations, it is standard practice for delegates to have equal voting rights.

*   *   *   *   *

Whatever restructuring of the AFL-CIO is deemed necessary, it should be done by providing opportunities for every union member to become involved in the process. That is the way to maintain unity while effecting change. We need talented labor leaders who are recognized and respected by broad sections of the labor movement for what they say and do. Inspiring the rank and-file to become involved offers the best guarantee that whatever changes are finally adopted will have the best chance of succeeding.

Article 5: Improving Collective Bargaining
(To be posted Monday, June 13, 2005)

Harry Kelber's e-mail address is: hkelber@igc.org

SEIU may leave AFL-CIO

Mon, 06 Jun 2005 19:13:57 GMT

Retired ROCU supporter mentions the growing rift in AFL-CIO and the movement, led by SEIU's Andy Stern among others, to reform the historic coalition or leave it. Here is an article from the Chicago Tribune that describes Stern's rationale and his possible support for a radical move at AFL-CIO's upcoming convention.

AFL-CIO may lose biggest union
Service Employees look to push changes at Chicago convention

By Stephen Franklin
Tribune Staff Reporter
Published June 4, 2005

WASHINGTON -- Its ranks deeply and angrily divided, organized labor's July gathering in Chicago appears likely to mark the departure of its largest union and the start of a drive to set up a competing organization to the 50-year-old labor federation.

"If nothing changes, we will leave the AFL-CIO," said Andy Stern, president of the 1.8 million-member Service Employees International Union and leader of an insurgency that has the backing of at least four other unions.

MORE

Stern suggests forming a new coalition of labor organizations that are presumably interested in exploring his idea of mergers as a means of cutting costs and increasing clout.

Looking ahead, Stern and others say that if they leave the AFL-CIO they will try to form a coalition among the dissident unions and with like-minded organizations such as the Carpenters Union.

Retired Rail on ROCU and Rail Unity

Mon, 06 Jun 2005 13:54:37 GMT

A retired operating rail responds to ROCU's invitation for support. In the process he reveals a grasp of rail labor history and offers constructive suggestions for the future. This is sound advice for ROCU and for any others who are interested in real labor unity.

I'm a retired hoghead; I worked on the old Southern Pacific system. (I was also a freight brakeman on the Penn Central for a while, and a yard brakeman on the Central of New Jersey for a while.) Even after taking promotion in engine service, I kept my membership in the UTU, where I was one of a loosely-organized group of rank and filers who campaigned--successfully, after many years--to get membership voting rights on national agreements.

I'm glad to see that some rails are once again raising the idea of cross-craft unity. I think it's a fine idea, long overdue--and, as you might expect, it's been thought of before. As far back as 1894, Eugene V. Debs, who had been a founder of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen (BLFE), which was one of the four operating craft unions that formed the UTU in the late 1960's, concluded that craft separation was hurting railroaders; he and others formed the American Railway Union (ARU), which was destroyed by management and government after the great Pullman Strike. New initiatives toward unity arose in the early 1920's but couldn't succeed against the opposition of the companies and the by-then solidly entrenched craft brotherhoods.

The picture changed after the passage of the Railway Labor Act in 1926, with significant amendments in 1934 and 1950. Provisions of the Act require that, in order to be recognized as bargaining agent under the law--that is, in order to negotiate collective bargaining agreements that the law will protect--an organization must be a "standard railway labor organization national in scope." The reasons this language was included in the law are complex, but in practice it has given the existing unions a permanent lock on their memberships.

For example, dissatisfied with the national agreement of 1947, a number of local brotherhood officers and members around San Jose, California--led by a BLE member, the late Jack Ford--launched United Rail Operating Crafts. They signed up dues-paying members--though most also kept paying dues to the BLE or Trainmen, etc., in order to protect their representation and union-administered job insurance--and they even published a very impressive newspaper, UROC Facts, for a couple of years. (A file is in the collection of the Bancroft LIbrary at UC Berkeley.) And after hard work they actually secured representation of one bargaining unit of trainmen on the old Western Pacific RR. But they never came close to having the power to negotiate on a national scale with the Association of American Railroads; the best they could do was to run a general committee on the WP, but the agreement was the same Trainmen's agreement they had been formed to resist. Needless to say, the brothers elsew here, seeing this, and getting tired of paying dues to two organizations only one of which could actually provide any services, dropped away, and UROC passed into history.

A briefer, local effort based in San Francisco and Oakland around 1960-61, SPROC (Southern Pacific Rail Operating Crafts) made even less headway, since it couldn't even begin to meet the "national in scope" requirement.

I bring all this up, not to throw cold water on your plans, but to urge you to study and learn from the lessons of these past experiences. One idea you might want to consider is how your vision fits with the program of Andy Stern, of SEIU, and other AFL-CIO officers who see union mergers as a necessary move if labor is to reverse its long decline in numbers and clout. Rail labor, in my experience, has had a tendency to ignore the rest of the labor movement; we have FELA, we have the RLA instead of the National Labor Relations Act, for many decades we had Railroad Retirement as a completely separate system from Social Security. In short we tried to live in our own little world. I think that was probably a mistake even when there were a couple million of us; nowadays I think it's definitely a mistake.

I wish you all success in your endeavors.

Railroads scramble to replace retiring workers

Mon, 06 Jun 2005 05:07:52 GMT

Rails call 'all aboard' as graying workers retire. LabourStart headline - Source: Reuters [US labour news from LabourStart]

Fifty years ago, the railroads employed 1.2 million workers; in 2000, faced with competition from airlines and truckers, they employed just under 250,000.

The most productive transportation workers in the world are retiring and the nation's railroads are hiring. We have to ask, where did all the profits go?

Join AFL-CIO TTD to Save AMTRAK

Mon, 06 Jun 2005 00:24:48 GMT

There is an AFL-CIO Tansportation Trades Department (TTD) grass-roots fight on to save AMTRAK from the Cheap-Labor Conservatives' train killing budgetary axe. You can participate at their webpage Fight to Save Amtrak.

FRA Reports Reveal RCL Safety Issues

Sun, 05 Jun 2005 22:28:06 GMT

The FRA issued two reports on May 24, 2005, one entitiled "Human Factors Root Cause Analysis of Accidents/Incidents Involving Remote Control Locomotives" and the other entitled "Remote Control Operations: Results of Focus Groups with Remote Control Operators in the U.S. and Canada."

In the first study, the FRA's Office of Research and Development focused on 6 out of a total of 67 RCL accidents/incidents reported by participating railroads between May and October of 2004. Their conclusions should come as no surprise to experienced RCOs.

Based on analysis of the probable contributing factors for the six RCL accidents/incidents, four
critical safety issues were identified:

Loss of RCO situation awareness. Loss of RCO situation awareness was identified as
a factor in five of the six RCL accidents/incidents analyzed.

Insufficient RCO training. Insufficienttraining was directly implicated as a contributing factor
among the RCL accidents/incidents. Improved training may also be able to mitigate some of the
skill-based and decision errors that were identified.

Inadequate staffing and pairing of inexperienced crewmembers. Though these
factors were identified as contributing to only one of the six RCL accidents/incidents analyzed
in the study, given the current industry shortage of switchmen and engineers, these may be
significant safety issues in the future, especially when combined with insufficient training.

Inadequate practices and procedures governing RCL operations and the use of
the RCL technology, including the pullback protection system. Inadequate practices and
procedures were identified as contributing factors in several RCL accidents/incidents.
Given that operating rules and practices govern most of railroading, inadequate practices
and procedures can have significant consequences.

In the second study, the FRA's Office of Research and Development met with 76 Remote Control Operators (RCOs) in 12 focus group meetings between March and May or 2003. These RCOs were interviewed in order to

Gather information on operator experiences with RCL operations.

Discern RCL operations safety-related issues.

Identify RCL operations "lessons learned" and "best practices."

Solicit suggestions for how to improve RCL

The themes that emerged from the interviews are, once again, no surprise to anyone with remote control experience:

Adequacy of RCO training. RCOs felt that 2 weeks (wk) of training may be inadequate
to fully prepare RCOs, given the added responsibilities and qualitative change to
the nature of the job from a switchman or engineer to an RCO.

Knowledge of RCL operations. RCOs felt that other operating employees and
management have a limited understanding of RCL operations, resulting in few rules,
little guidance on what to do in unusual circumstances, changing and sometimes
problematic procedures, cuts of cars that are as long as the remote control zone
(RCZ), poor communications between RCOs and management, and inadequate
maintenance of equipment. Separately, RCOs said that they have encountered
employees who work in the vicinity of, or with, RCOs who are not familiar with RCL
operations and procedures.

Perceived reliability of RCL equipment. RCOs described several types of reliability
problems associated with the RCL equipment, including communication
failures between the RCD and OCC, frequent error messages, delays in RCL
response, and RCL overspeed.

Inadvertent activation of the RCD. RCOs reported frequent problems with inadvertent
activation of the RCD. Causes of inadvertent activation include the location of
switches, bumping into rail equipment as a result of mounting or dismounting
equipment, and use of thick gloves in cold weather.

RCO situation awareness. RCOs report that operating the RCL on the ground away
from the locomotive has reduced some of the critical feedback cues (visual and
kinesthetic) available to cab-based operators, and consequently reduces their
situation awareness.

Other-than-yard operations. A few RCOs were comfortable with the prospect of
taking an RCL out onto the main track. However, a majority of RCOs were not
comfortable, citing among their reasons that the equipment is currently unreliable,
and that they lack the required knowledge and skills to operate on the main track.

So, several years into the RCL experiment and after intense study on the taxpayers' dime, the FRA has determined what we could and have told them from the beginning - there are inherent risks associated with use of remote control technology in the nation's rail yards and the risks are increased by the cheap and slipshod manner in which it has been implemented.

You can read the reports themselves at:

http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/Research/rr0505.pdf
http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/Research/rr0503.pdf

National Mediation Board on Representation

Sun, 05 Jun 2005 06:37:01 GMT

With all the talk of A-cards and Representation Elections and Crafts and Classes, it makes sense to go to the source, the National Mediation Board (NMB), to get some answers as to what it all means. NMB happens to have an online Representation Manual and an online FAQ which addresses some of our questions. The FAQ, however is prefaced with the following disclaimer:

These questions and answers are meant to provide general guidance only. They do not provide definitive determination of any representation matter and are not to be construed as legal opinions that may be cited in any administrative, legal or arbitral proceeding.

On the matter of authorization cards (A-cards) the NMB FAQ states the following:

5. Q: What is an authorization card?

A: An authorization card is a card or document signed by the employee which states that the employee desires to be represented by an organization or individual for collective bargaining purposes. Authorization cards must have the name of the organization or individual seeking to represent the craft or class, and must be signed and dated by the employee. Typically, authorization cards also include the following information: employee address, telephone number, job title, employee number, and social security number. The NMB compares the signed authorization cards to the List of Potential Eligible Voters supplied by the carrier to determine the percentage of employees signing authorization cards (generally referred to as the "showing of interest").

7. Q: What is a showing of interest?

A: A showing of interest is the percentage of the craft or class that has signed authorization cards. An application must be supported by an adequate showing of interest, in the form of employee authorization cards. Authorizations will be considered invalid if dated more than one year prior to the date on the NMB application. If the craft or class is already represented under the RLA and is covered by a valid existing collective bargaining agreement, the application must be supported from a majority (50% plus one) of valid authorization cards by employees in the craft or class. If the craft or class is unrepresented, the application must be supported by at least 35% of valid authorization cards by employees in the craft or class.

8. Q: Can an employee in the craft or class sign an authorization card for more than one organization?

A: Yes.

9. Q: What is an Intervenor?

A: Once an organization has filed an application, another organization may intervene in the representation dispute and place itself on the ballot by presenting authorization cards signed by at least 35% of the employees in the craft or class.

10. Q: How can employees change their labor organization?

A: Employees can change their labor organization by signing authorization cards for another organization, which then files an application and "wins" an election.

11. Q: How can employees decertify their current representative without getting another one?

A: There is no application for decertification, however if a majority of the craft or class does not vote for representation the current representative will lose its representation rights.

12. Q: Can employees form and elect their own union?

A: Yes, employees can form their own organization if they submit an application supported by a sufficient showing of interest.

The definition of craft or class and the factors considered in their determination are given as:

14. Q: What is a craft or class?

A: Craft or class is a term used for the group of employees the applicant seeks to represent. Crafts or classes must be system-wide.

15. Q: What factors are considered in determining the proper craft or class?

A: The Board considers several facts in determining a proper craft of class including: the composition and relative permanency of the employee grouping along craft or class lines; the functions, duties and responsibilities of the employees; the general nature of the work performed, and; the community of interest between job classifications.

We also learn from reading this FAQ that the NMB has, like the UTU, opted for the ease and convenience of telephone voting.

21. Q: How are NMB representation elections conducted?

A: Most elections are conducted by Telephone Electronic Voting (TEV). Approximately three weeks prior to the tally, each voter is mailed Voting Instructions explaining how to vote if the voter wants to be represented. In a standard TEV election, employees who want to vote for representation call in to cast their vote. The votes are tallied electronically. The results of the tally are provided to the organization(s) and the carrier in writing.

It would also seem that decertification could be prevented by not getting a majority of A-cards signed and avoiding a representation election. If it goes to an election and the majority of elegible voters don't vote, then the incumbent organization loses its representation status. If a new organization is certified, the existing contracts MAY remain in effect:

39. Q: If a representation application is dismissed, does the current representative of the craft or class of employees lose its representation rights?

A: It depends. If an organization files an application for a craft or class that is already represented, the incumbent organization is a party in the investigation and election. If the organization which filed the application does not have an adequate showing of interest or for some other reason the application is dismissed prior to an election, the incumbent organization will remain the representative of the craft or class. If the investigation proceeds to an election and a majority of the eligible voters in the craft or class do not vote in the election, then the application is dismissed and the incumbent organization loses its representation status. In determining whether a majority of employees voted, all votes for representation are totaled.

40. Q: If a new organization is certified, does the collective bargaining agreement with the incumbent organization remain in force and effect until the new organization and the carrier negotiate a collective bargaining agreement?

A: This is not part of the representation procedures under the Act, but generally the answer is yes.

Don't forget to check out The Rail Forum's online petition to the NMB in support of the traditional operating crafts.

The Rail Forum Petition in support of Historic Operating Crafts

Sat, 04 Jun 2005 18:29:21 GMT

The Rail Forum posts an online petition that you can sign in support of continued recognition of historical operating crafts:

Petition to National Mediation Board against the UTU attempt to combine crafts on the Union Pacific

The United Transportation Union's (UTU) May 27 petition asks the NMB to rule that a single craft of operating employees exists on the UP. The petition also asks the NMB to order a representation election for the supposedly new craft of "train and engine service employees."

Several negative consequences could be harmful to rank-and-file rail workers if operating crafts are combined and the UTU is allowed to hold a representation election.

A single operating craft could lead to fewer jobs in the rail industry, and possibly combined extra boards and dovetailed seniority rosters
The carrier could take the position that all current operating rules and pay scales are out the window because there would no longer be locomotive engineers, conductors and trainmen. There are no agreements in place for the craft of train and engine service employee and thus could lead to the loss of worker rights and working conditions fought for by labor over the last 150 years.
UTU contends to the NMB that new technology and other factors, such as the line of progression from train service to engine service, have blurred historical craft distinctions to create a single craft or class of train and engine service employees on UP. But UTU publicly claims to affected UP rail workers that if they are successful in winning a representation vote upon the NMB ruling for a newly combined craft/class of service, they will keep the former historic crafts separate with their own seniority rosters and agreements. This runs counter to the UTU's original claim to the NMB that craft lines have blurred and should be combined.
The authors and signatories of this petition, most of whom work in the railroad industry and would be adversely affected if the UTU's petition is ruled on favorably, respectfully request the National Mediation Board deny the UTU's request for combining the historical crafts and/or class of trainmen and engineer.

Workplace Stress - An Unjury, Not A Disease

Sat, 04 Jun 2005 15:37:46 GMT

Those pesky Canadians are at it again. National healthcare. Cheap prescription drugs. Now they want to redefine workplace stress as an injury, not a disease. The Canadian Labour Congress, national voice of the labor movement in Canada and representing 3 million workers, has issued a press release announcing an effort to treat the causes of workplace stress and not just its symptoms.

Recognizing the workplace as a stressor is long overdue," says Clarke Walker. "Once workplace stress is seen as an injury, its causes can be removed the same way we already deal with other hazzards like harassment, dangerous equipment, toxic materials and unsafe working conditions.

Guess when you reframe the question, sometimes the answers pop out at you.

What Size and Color of Safey Hat Are You Wearing

Fri, 03 Jun 2005 17:18:27 GMT

Many of us laboring for the nation's railroads are truly concerned about the safety of ourselves and our experienced and inexperienced co-workers. Because of our experience and unique position to observe how risk and safety play out in the field, we can perhaps be considered the real safety experts. Our bosses also claim to be concerned about safety although their committment at times seems to be less than ours. When they are under the gun to get the trains moving or when there is not enough money in the budget to provide a totally safe work environment, then you will find them compromising on safety. These compromises can be viewed as the result of a realistic assessment of business realities if you are a manager, or as a form of hypocrisy if you are on the receiving end of a risky situation.

As an example, consider the following real but surreal Sup. Bulletin issued somewhere in UP Land:

Superintendent Bulletin #102

"To enhance safety on the service unit, newer employees will be identified with distinctive hats

while in the field."

Employees with less than one year, fluorescent Orange hat.

Employees with less than three years fluorescent Green hat.

Having colluded with a labor organization (our beloved UTU, sigh) to implement a cheap but inadequate training program for newhires, the mighty UP is looking for a cheap fix. Between an expensive training program that really prepares newhires for independent service or buying a few cheap fluorescent hats, you know what they are going to go with. We agree with the anonymous brother who penned the following, and ask our union to do the cheap and painless thing. Simply oppose a cheap measure that doesn't address the real safety issue:

Discussion:

Why is there a need to identify employees by using different colored hats? The employee already knows he is new, other crewmembers know he is new, so to whom are they identifying themselves to?

The new employee already has enough to worry about, he does not need to wear a scarlet letter to be identified.

How does this "safety hat" promote safety, if in fact the issue is SAFETY?

I think that this is unfair treatment of the new hires and newer employees. Setting these employees apart from others is profiling and identifies employees to management only. Is this putting a target on the forehead of the employee? What will be next, if your on the discipline system will you now have to wear a black hat? Where does it end, what other identifiers will be put on UP employees?

I think if the Union lets this happen, we will be opening up pandora's box. This hat issue undermines the true essence of safety and does nothing for my safety or yours.

Recommendation:

The Union opposes these safety hats and. This is a bad idea, it does nothing to improve safety and degrades our members.

ROCU Calls for End to UTU/BLET War

Fri, 03 Jun 2005 03:25:44 GMT

Rail Operating Crafts United (ROCU) issues a statement on the current volleys in the endless BLET/UTU war:

The UTU Appeal to the NMB for a Vote on the UP and the BLET Petition for an A-Card Vote on the NS - ROCU's Position

Railroad Operating Crafts United (ROCU) opposes both the BLET's move for an A-Card election on the Norfolk Southern, and the UTU's petition before the NMB for a "single-craft" election on the Union Pacific for the following reasons:



n      The actions of both unions needlessly ratchet up the ongoing UTU-BLET war to the detriment of the rank-and-file of both organizations. The rank-and-file of both unions want unity - not war and divisiveness.

n      No matter what the final outcome of either organization's attempt, the end result will not be greater solidarity among the ranks, but only more bitterness, resentment, and animosity.

n      ROCU believes the membership of both unions should control their future. Neither the UTU's case before the NMB nor the BLET's A-Card petition is a rank-and-file initiative. Neither effort is designed to mobilize the membership and/or strengthen internal union democracy. These confrontations only serve the interest of the national leadership and the Carriers.

n      Finally, in the face of the Carriers' attack upon all railroad crafts and our unions, these actions display how out-of-touch with their membership the leadership has become. The irresponsible and reckless actions of both unions are misdirected energies, spent once again fighting each other, rather than building the necessary unity and strength necessary to mount an effective fight back campaign against our one real adversary - the Carriers.

To put it another way, the leadership of our unions aren't giving us the one choice we really want: a democratic merger. That's why we have formed ROCU - to stand for a merger agreement written by and for the membership. We stand against inter-union warfare. Based on the overwhelming response we've been getting, we think you might agree with this. If so, please contact ROCU and help build the national initiative for a democratic merger of our two unions.

Railroad Operating Crafts United

312-924-1437

ROCUtoday@gmail.com

www.ROCUtoday.com

Direct Action Gets the Goods

Thu, 02 Jun 2005 13:29:07 GMT

Employers should beware, the Wobblies are back
--nationally known law firm Bullivant Houser Bailey advising their clients

From the January 13, 2005 SACRAMENTO NEWS & REVIEW comes a short history of the IWW and an account of the Wobblies' resurgence. As pointed out below, 2005 marks the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Industrial Workers of the World, a radical workers' organization that has educated and inspired working stiffs, defied attempts to snuff it out, and now seems to be enjoying renewed success organizing its traditional base. Immigrants and those laboring in low-skilled industries or jobs that the big business unions won't organize have always found an ally in the IWW.

Unable to get more than verbal support from the Teamsters, a group of Stockton, CA independent truck drivers last year defied federal law and joined the IWW during their wildcat strike over compensation for rising fuel costs. In the process they demonstrated the value of direct action in a transportation industry that has engineered itself into a corner with its logistics revolution of just-in-time delivery. The resulting choke points leave the industry's Goliaths vulnerable to the Wobbly-esque tactics of direct action Davids.

UTU Mafia Looking for a few good Informers

Tue, 31 May 2005 15:49:09 GMT

Some are arguing that US Labor law needs to be changed to "level the playing field" so that labor can get a fair shake. In particular, an environment where bosses have almost free reign to say almost anything to the captive audience of their workforce while working stiffs can be restricted in their possibly Constitutional Right to speak, associate and organize in the workplace, well, that just ain't fair or right. As an example, we have the Norfolk Southern issuing an edict attempting to influence the current A-card campaign by prohibiting "solicitation of any type, including recruitment and/or union organizing among agreement employees" on NS private property.

Amidst this nonsense comes an astounding post on UURR, a letter from UTU Cleveland to all NS Local Officers and Chairpersons hinting that they spy on their union brothers and hoping that they snitch out any violators of this NS company policy who dare to talk union on the job. You may think the NS A-card campaign is as stupid as UTU's UP NMB petition, you may think it's all about a down and dirty fight for dues-paying members, but UTU must think itself incapable of winning such a fight on the merits in a free and open debate. Good political tactics or the acts of desperate men? You decide. But I think most of us would draw a line at snitching out a union brother, no matter what organization he pays his dues to.

Linux and Open Source Revolutionizing Labor Organizing

Mon, 30 May 2005 14:50:56 GMT

An article from TechNewsWorld addresses the four requirements for an effective social or labor movement, whether it be for reform, merger or something completely new.

For a union to work you need a critical mass of people, you need a way to organize them as a resource, you need the power of threat, and you need effective leadership.

The author suggests a surprising candidate and model for the emerging next big labor organization, the Software Labor Union. He argues that this movement is only lacking the effective leadership to succeed.

The Most Powerful Labor Union in the World: Linux?

By Rob Enderle
TechNewsWorld
05/30/05 5:10 AM PT

This is power that Microsoft, Oracle, IBM and many governments could only dream of having. The power to control the press and the skills contained in this organization are likely capable of disrupting travel, power grids and other broad national infrastructure systems if their demands are not met.

MORE

Hackers Discover RCLs

Mon, 30 May 2005 03:31:08 GMT

2600 The Hacker Quarterly, Vol. 22, Nbr. 1,
pays tribute to RCLs on its back cover. The
hackers suggest,

"This has to be about the worst idea ever concocted."

We wonder why they would say that.

Big Bad Boss or Management Through Intimidation

Mon, 30 May 2005 01:05:56 GMT

Guess we've all met examples of these out-of-control managers making our lives miserable. We propose a contest. Send us your examples of the most offensive managers you've encountered.

USA: Big, bad boss tales: NIOSH recognizes worker bullying as a workplace hazard. LabourStart headline [Health and Safety NewsWire from Hazards and LabourStart]

Next Round of Union BS - UTU Goes Back to the NMB Begging for Single Class of Service

Sat, 28 May 2005 20:58:29 GMT

While the rank-and-file suffers and faces even more losses through the next "agreement", UTU and BLET are up to their old self-serving games. BLET has apparently initiated an A-card campaign on the NS because it feels it is in a position to win that and a subsequent representation vote. UTU, in self-defense, seems to be reacting to BLET's move and to the intent of the carriers to break crew consist agreements and go to one-man over-the-road trains. A loss on either front could be catastrophic to UTU, so they have returned to their old friend the NMB, hoping to get a favorable ruling on the question of whether industry changes, including technological developments, have rendered the old craft distinctions moot. Does it make more sense (from whose standpoint, we must ask) to agree to a single class of rail operating employee, a multi-use, combo, train service employee who can run a locomotive and work on the ground as well? If you are cynical enough, and we think that includes the majority of working rails, you might see this as an attempt to make sure that when the dust of the next give-back round of "negotiations" settles, one or the other organization will emerge with enough dues paying members to survive. As we've said before, the UTU leadership would sell out their own mothers if they could be replaced with dues paying hoggers. We're sure the other shoe fits as well.

That being said, there is some truth to the statement found on The Rail Forum:

"The big difference between what the UTU is doing on the UP and what the BLE-T is doing on the NS, is that the BLE-T is leaving it up to the NS railroad workers to decide if they would support a representation election between the BLE-T and UTU while still preserving the crafts of engineer and trainman.", said one BLE-T local chairman.

He further added, "The UTU is not letting the UP workers have a voice in deciding if they want a representation vote. They are charging straight to the NMB and asking them to create the representation dispute by wiping out the two crafts and creating one new craft. Then the UTU and BLE-T would face off in a ‘winner take all’ election to represent the newly created craft."

It may be too late. It may not make any difference. But let us suggest that any thinking rail who is really concerned about his future in the rail industry should consider contacting and working with the growing group of UTU and BLET members that is forming to turn the pyramids of power on their heads in order to get something done, something that benefits the memberships and not just the leaderships. That would be the Rail Operating Crafts United (ROCU).

ROCU
www.rocutoday.com
rocutoday@gmail.com

312-924-1437

Global Oil Depletion and the Railroad Industry

Thu, 26 May 2005 17:37:04 GMT

Has oil production peaked? Have we failed to plan for a future of oil scarcity by researching and developing alternative sources of energy? If you are concerned about these questions consider LIFE AFTER THE OIL CRASH and THE LONG EMERGENCY. If we are in fact running out of oil, what are the consequences for the railroad industry? Kunstler, in his book, reviewed at Amazon but hopefully purchased at someplace like Powells, is positive about the future of railroads as a long-haul mode of transportation in an otherwise regional reorganization of society and economy.

America today has a railroad system that the Bulgarians would be ashamed of. Neither of the two major presidential candidates in 2004 mentioned railroads, but if we don't refurbish our rail system, then there may be no long-range travel or transport of goods at all a few decades from now. The commercial aviation industry, already on its knees financially, is likely to vanish. The sheer cost of maintaining gigantic airports may not justify the operation of a much-reduced air-travel fleet. Railroads are far more energy efficient than cars, trucks or airplanes, and they can be run on anything from wood to electricity. The rail-bed infrastructure is also far more economical to maintain than our highway network.

So perhaps all the newhires looking for a railroading career are not making a big mistake but are in fact positioning themselves to succeed in the emerging economy.