Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Railroads dealt setback in bids for one person crews.
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
Published Saturday <br />March 11, 2006 <br /> <br />Railroads dealt setback in bid for 1-person crew <br /> <br />BY STACIE HAMEL <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER <br /> <br /> <br />A judge ruled Friday that a union has no obligation to take part in national bargaining with railroads over the size of train crews, apparently thwarting carriers' immediate hopes of implementing one-person crews. <br /> <br />The carriers affected include the Omaha-based Union Pacific Railroad and BNSF Railway Co., which also operates in Nebraska and Iowa. <br /> <br />The lawsuit was filed in March 2005 by the United Transportation Union, which represents mostly conductors, against railroads represented in negotiations by the National Carriers' Conference Committee. <br /> <br />The UTU has been in negotiation with the carriers since Jan. 1, 2005, over rates of pay and working conditions. <br /> <br />A union spokesman called the ruling a significant victory. National Carriers' Conference Committee representatives were not immediately available. <br /> <br />The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge G. Patrick Murphy of Southern Illinois also rebuffed railroads' request that the union join in proposing that Congress repeal or change the Federal Employer Liability Act, which allows injured railroad workers to sue carriers for on-the-job injuries. <br /> <br />The agreements over crew size - known as crew consist agreements - were negotiated railroad-by-railroad, rather than through national bargaining, and require at least one conductor and, in some cases, a brakeman on all through freight trains. <br /> <br />In his order, Murphy wrote, "UTU has no obligation to bargain with Defendant Carriers in national handling regarding the crew consist issues . . . the subject is local as a matter of law." <br /> <br />He wrote, however, that national bargaining is appropriate on a wage-reduction proposal once crew consist has been resolved at the local level. <br /> <br />On the proposal regarding the Federal Employer Liability Act, Murphy wrote that the issue is outside the scope of mandatory bargaining and railroads have no right to insist that the union negotiate. <br /> <br /> <br />Contact the Omaha World-Herald newsroom <br /> <br />Copyright ©2006 Omaha World-Herald®. <br />
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy