Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers & Trainmen  
Division 758

Richard E. Etienne
Vancouver, WA
rick@etnsplace.com

Brothers and Sisters,

The following is a series of correspondence between the GCA and Crew regarding misunderstandings in force assigning locomotive engineers around the seniority districts. Hopefully this will explain things to you, the members, regarding force assignments.

From Dennis Pierce

To: 'Shire, Gene L'; 'Holt, Sherry L'

Subject: RE: Engineer Primary Recall

Gene and Sherry,

This is on the 700 Rules question that Sherry sent out, the application described below is limited to the 700 rules world and may or may not match the application for engineer assignments outside of the 700 Rules.

The former BN entered into identical agreements with BLE and UTU back in the early 80's wherein engineers forced to another zone are allowed to be released back to demoted status at the location that they were forced from whenever a demoted engineer becomes available in the "zone" that they are forced to. Those understandings specifically reference when a junior demote becomes available in the zone forced to. This form of relief does not include a demote becoming available in the zone forced from, nor does it apply to someone forced within a single zone. Bottom line, the application of our agreements, BLE and UTU, has always allowed what is usually a senior forced man to vacate the engineers quota where forced and return to the ground from whence they came, having been replaced by a junior demoted home boy that became available in the zone forced to.

While we didn't change the application of those agreements in the primary recall, I think that it goes without saying that if a senior man places into a zone where junior men are forced, he would obviously trigger relief for the forced engineers as well. Prior to primary recall, that senior demoted man would have had to take an engineers position when he placed into the terminal as a demote if his seniority placed him in the engineers quota. While the primary recall agreement would no longer make him move into the engineers quota unless he successfully bid there or was forced there himself, the intent of the 84 agreements was to prevent an engineer from remaining forced to a location where there were demotes. For that reason, any demote placing into a zone where there are forced engineers would trigger relief in my mind and applying that to available senior demotes would not appear to conflict with anyone's agreements.

As we did discuss the process that must be used to release the forced men in any event during our negotiations on the primary recall, I am throwing that piece in for Sherry's benefit. This may also be unique to the 700 rule world. Currently, some locations ask that forced engineers keep a written release from force request on file so they can be released before a junior man is demoted in the zone they are forced to during a board reduction there. The other option is for the forced engineer to wait until the junior man in the quota is demoted in the zone forced to and then ask for relief after that junior engineer is demoted. While the first option may save board moves and be used at some locations, the rule itself always allows the employee to make the request for relief if and when a junior employee is demoted in the zone, or when someone places demoted from somewhere else into the forced zone that they are forced to. Without changing that rule, we still have to honor these requests when they are received.

One other item that sort of holds all of this "relief when forced" piece together is how we continue to identify those that have been forced to another zone. To force an engineer, there has to be a vacant position that goes unbid. When it does go unbid, we then force the appropriate employee to that position. He can't really just be forced to the location, there has to be a specific unbid job waiting on him. Those forced to another zone in this manner have the right to file a timely permanent bid covering the assignments at the forced zone when initially forced. So long as the timely bid is filed before the forced engineer works the specific job that he/she was technically forced to, the 48 hour wait on the bid sheet is then waived and the forced engineer can take the job of his/her choice within the new zone that they were forced to. Again, these timely filed bid rights are limited to assignments within the zone forced to, and only apply to those forced across a zone line. The filing of this timely bid is not required, but the exercise of these rights does not affect the "forced" status if exercised, exercised or not they are still considered forced. Nor do later moves up or down by permanent bid while they are at the forced zone affect their forced status, so long as those moves are confined to the zone forced to. They are still considered force assigned and must be released as described above. Once they turn down an offer to return to their demoted zone, be it by not filing a release request or by then not requesting relief when junior demotes become available in their forced zone, they would lose their forced status, but not before then. When they lose their forced status, they then lose the benefits of the BLE/UTU/BN understandings from 84 and can then only be demoted when they have exhausted the engineer's quota at the location they are working.

One last piece on losing forced status, not only is the permanent bid applicable for movement up and down between jobs in the zone forced to as described above, the active permanent bid on file is still applicable for bidding or bumping to assignments in other zones or locations while in forced status. However, using that bid sheet to bid out of the forced zone also eliminates the forced status. In the event the engineer in the example below that was forced from Zone C to Zone A is the senior bidder back to an engineer's assignment in Zone C, he would be awarded the position but he would then lose his forced status in Zone A by bidding out of it. Even more possible, if the same engineer bids to Zone D while forced from Zone C to Zone A, he would lose his forced status period, it would not apply at Zone D. The same would apply if a forced engineer is displaced within his forced zone and the active permanent bid on file directs him to bump onto an assignment in a different zone. This voluntary placement by permanent bid to a position out of the forced zone, after being displaced, would also take away the forced status. Again, so long as all of the movements by permanent bid, up or down, are confined to the zone forced to, the man is still considered in forced assigned status. However, voluntary movement out of the forced zone either upward by bid or downward/displacement by bid would take away the forced status.

The next question is involving the 700 rules territory again. If we have had to force an employee from station C into station A, and an employee in station A is now unable to hold as an engineer do we release the employee forced into station A from station C even if the employee from station A is senior to the employee from station C?
I agree with your answer on releasing the forced engineer, but I don't see this as any change from what our current collective agreements have allowed since 84.

I do want to chime in on a couple of other piece from one of your earlier answers. Sorry about the delay, but I have been on the road for the past few weeks.

#1. We are making it clear to our Local Chairmen that we did not change what you have to exhaust on downward or displacement moves prior to leaving the engineer's quota. The primary recall provisions change upward or promotional movement, but they do not change, increase or decrease what you have to do or exhaust to get demoted. I may not have to go to the engineer's quota like before, but once I get there, I still have to exhaust it at the location before I can demote. As you said, we are being very specific on that to avoid any bumps with UTU's agreements or positions. For that reason, we did not change what happens in the event that I have no bids on file when I am bumped but I can still hold the quota at my location. Prior to primary recall, I had to take the position held by the junior man at my location if I had no bids, that wasn't changed. If there are forced engineers involved, we didn't really change that either. If I take the junior man at the location because I had no bid, that man becoming demoted would trigger the relief pieces for those in forced status described above.

#2. I know that you may have issues on the SF side on forcing from the bump boards but I want to add in a qualifier that has always been applied on our side. When an engineer is initially bumped out of the engineer's quota at our locations, we have always applied that he must be notified of that displacement and be allowed to immediately exercise his ground seniority before being forced somewhere else. If the involved demoted engineer accepts notification and stays at the involved location on the trainmen's bump board, or places at that location in any demoted status, he stands for force assignment to unbid engineer positions as a demote at that location, be it from the bump board or from the job he place to. However, if he exercises ground service seniority to another location immediately upon being notified of the bump from our quota and never lingers on the bump board, he becomes a demote standing for force assignment based on the new location. While this is only applicable on the initial bump out of our quota, we have always maintained that folks be given a chance to place in demoted status on acceptance of notification of being bumped back to demoted status, before determining their demoted location for force assignment purposes. Those who are already working the ground and are bumping between ground jobs have always been considered demotes at that location under our rules, be it notified, on the bump board or on a job. Those folks are not moving to demoted status, they are already there, in those cases we have no disagreement with your position on our side. I now it will be a test of everyones memory, but I know that I was involved in a case involving this initial notification in 1988 and I believe that Roger and Steve Bratka were involved in developing the handling described here.

The rest of your answers in this thread look to be on point, hope our input helps,

Dennis Pierce

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Shire, Gene L

To: Holt, Sherry L

Subject: RE: Engineer Primary Recall

Here are my answers. I see the General Chairmen are addressed. I would appreciate being made aware of any potential disputes.

Gene
 

From: Holt, Sherry L

To: Shire, Gene L

Subject: RE: Engineer Primary Recall

Gene,

A few more questions have come to surface.

The first question is in regards to handling the extraboards on the Frisco territory. At those locations the extraboards are not advertised, nor filled by any bid type. They are filled simply by forcing the senior demoted engineer on the seniority roster regardless of their location. Does this practice continue or do we force the Jr. demoted engineer at the station?

I received a message from General Chairman Gibbons and since there is no current process allowing "Frisco" engineers to access (bid to) the extra board, for the time being we should force assign the senior demote as in the past. We will have to fix this at some point in order to make this element of the "Frisco" agreement fit the intent of the Primary Recall Agreement.

Example locations: Amory, Birmingham, Kancso and Chafee all have extraboards forced to immediately. I do show however, Ft.Worth Frisco, Madill, Okcity frisco, Enid and Tulsa all have agreements changing the process to fill by standing bid, and thus resolves the issue. How do we handle the locations where this was not covered within the agreement?

Where we have standing bid, honor the bid. If none, at only those locations under the "Frisco" where they have permanent bid, force the junior demote under the Primary Recall provisions.

The next question is involving the 700 rules territory again. If we have had to force an employee from station C into station A, and an employee in station A is now unable to hold as an engineer do we release the employee forced into station A from station C even if the employee from station A is senior to the employee from station C?

We should release the force assigned engineer. In this case we would be treading of the UTU agreements since the alternative would be to allow the junior engineer to enter ground service.

Thank you for your help,

Sherry