Timesheets for employees of Amtrak are riddled with abuse, according to a recent audit report, with cases of workers claiming over 40 hours of work in a single day.
The audit released by Amtrak’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) Thursday found examples of abuse in the overtime system, which totaled nearly $200 million in overtime pay last year..............
http://freebeacon.com/issues/amtrak-employees-claimed-to-work-40-hours-per-day/
This is going to get interesting. There used to be timeslipping where somebody got passed on the seniority roster would be paid even though they didn't work but somebody else did the job. But 130 hrs of OT? Does a car attendent get paid OT for his 44 hr trip from LA to Chi?
Labor accounts for 29% of Amtrak's costs. After this revelation, that should change.
"Of those 10 employees, a serving attendant in the Café Car, who earns an average of $23 an hour, recorded 47.95 hours in one day, 31.01 of which were recoded as overtime."
So that would be 16.94 hours @ $23/hr = $389.62. And then 31.01 hrs @ 1.5 time ($34.50/hr.) = $1069.85. Total for one day for one attendant = $1459.47. No wonder Amtrak F&B expenses are so high.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
To the O.P:
I don't know anything about the Washington Free Beacon, but maybe that's my own fault. In any case, I'd prefer to hear this kind of information from a more established news source with an established track record.
Schlimm:
I don't think your figures come from the Washington Free Beacon feature cited. Can you tell us your source?
_______________
In general, I tend to look askance at this type of reporting. I know it could be true in a few cases, and might represent actual dishonesty. I don't deny that possibility. But I don't know the specific provisions of all of Amtrak's various Union agreements. It is possible that overtime and/or holiday pay might be calculated in multiples of one-hour increments, leading to high numbers of hours in a particular day. I don't believe numbers like this would have been achievable under the provisions of my own craft's contract. It's also possible that this happened because of an error. Maybe there are other explanations.
Others have disagreed with me when I have suggested that today's O.I.G. is not so independent of political influence as we might hope, and that they have a poor understanding of operational realities. I hope those folks are right and I am wrong.
Tom
ACYSchlimm: I don't think your figures come from the Washington Free Beacon feature cited. Can you tell us your source?
The numbers came from the article, which came from the OIG report released last Thursday. I simply calculated the total pay from the case from the article which I quoted. I corrected the faulty math, but the number is still incredible.
Subsequently I found the source for the news report, the OIG. I think it is unwise to cast aspersions on the OIG because it found things that are embarrassing.
Here is the link. I hope you check it thoroughly.
https://www.amtrakoig.gov/sites/default/files/reports/oig-mar-2015-011_redacted.pdf
Working for a freight railroad in train service, I was able to claim 3 basic (8 hrs/130 mile) days on top of the 160 miles for a single tour of duty once. It was the work rules and provisions of the contract that allowed that. Three of the basic days were penalty days, using us instead of calling another crew. (We were dogcatching. The contracts have changed since then. The most one could accrue now under the same circumstances is 2 days total.)
I don't know what their contracts allow. Could there be fraud? Of course, but there also could be legitimate reasons for claiming the time.
All our time slips and claims are all reviewed by timekeeping. I would assume theirs are too. If there was time being claimed that shouldn't be allowed, why did the timekeepers approve them?
Jeff
jeffhergert Working for a freight railroad in train service, I was able to claim 3 basic (8 hrs/130 mile) days on top of the 160 miles for a single tour of duty once. It was the work rules and provisions of the contract that allowed that. Three of the basic days were penalty days, using us instead of calling another crew. (We were dogcatching. The contracts have changed since then. The most one could accrue now under the same circumstances is 2 days total.) I don't know what their contracts allow. Could there be fraud? Of course, but there also could be legitimate reasons for claiming the time. All our time slips and claims are all reviewed by timekeeping. I would assume theirs are too. If there was time being claimed that shouldn't be allowed, why did the timekeepers approve them? Jeff
Frankly, any contract that allows this [Total for one day for one attendant = $1459.47] is an obscene abuse of the taxpayers.
Well at a bare minimum they need to simplify the union agreements and timesheets. This is the kind of thing that Amtrak Management should have been on top of instead of waiting for a media expose.
Evidently no one seems to know work rules of railroading. Nor how many days you can work in 24 hours. Depends of your job classification, what other jobs you are asked to do during your job shift, how long your job shift is minimum and maximum, what minimum you get for jobs outside your classification, how many times during your shift you do jobs of other crafts, different union contracts. You could work an actual 4-5 hours, get 8 hours pay for your job and maybe several out of craft jobs during that time. Then come back to work in the same calendar day after legal rest and repeat the out of craft jobs, too. So, yeah, it is possible to rack up 40 hours in a day. Amtrak is not the only railroad this is possible. And most of those old rules are falling by the wayside as time goes on.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
CMStPnP Well at a bare minimum they need to simplify the union agreements and timesheets. This is the kind of thing that Amtrak Management should have been on top of instead of waiting for a media expose.
Exactly. I would hope nobody here will rationalize away a system that paid a food service attendant ~$1500 for one day's work.
schlimmExactly. I would hope nobody here will rationalize away a system that paid a food service attendant ~$1500 for one day's work.
Let's wait and see....ha-ha-ha-ha. I can see ACY's point that this might be a little sensationalized based on how the rules work but parts of it sound true.
If some of it is related to rules....again, Amtrak Management should have been on top of this earlier and fixed it. No brainer.
schlimm jeffhergert Working for a freight railroad in train service, I was able to claim 3 basic (8 hrs/130 mile) days on top of the 160 miles for a single tour of duty once. It was the work rules and provisions of the contract that allowed that. Three of the basic days were penalty days, using us instead of calling another crew. (We were dogcatching. The contracts have changed since then. The most one could accrue now under the same circumstances is 2 days total.) I don't know what their contracts allow. Could there be fraud? Of course, but there also could be legitimate reasons for claiming the time. All our time slips and claims are all reviewed by timekeeping. I would assume theirs are too. If there was time being claimed that shouldn't be allowed, why did the timekeepers approve them? Jeff Frankly, any contract that allows this [Total for one day for one attendant = $1459.47] is an obscene abuse of the taxpayers.
Obviously you have no understanding of Managements desire to violate existing labor agreements (note - the AGREEMENTS were AGREED to by both parties). Violation of specific parts of agreements have defined penalty payments. The penalties are the FAULT OF MANAGMENT, not the employees.
Extenuating circumstance (manpower shortages in the moment) are the normal cause for contract violation, and under those circumstance management is more than willing to pay any price to achieve it's goal for the moment.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDObviously you have no understanding of Managements desire to violate existing labor agreements (note - the AGREEMENTS were AGREED to by both parties). Violation of specific parts of agreements have defined penalty payments. The penalties are the FAULT OF MANAGMENT, not the employees. Extenuating circumstance (manpower shortages in the moment) are the normal cause for contract violation, and under those circumstance management is more than willing to pay any price to achieve it's goal for the moment.
Don't you think that is besides the point? If I am a manager of a taxpayer funded Corporation and for decades I pay someone to stand around and make sure the walls of a room do not move.......don't you think there will be larger repercussions (part of which your seeing in this thread) once the taxpayers find out.
So as management wouldn't you at least feel a little bit encumbent to streamline the agreements over time and make them more common sense. Gee I don't know like what Florida East Coast did with the locomotive Fireman in the 1960's?
The taxpayers are largely the investors of Amtrak and this type of news story exaggerated or not is going to tick them off and impact Amtrak's funding at some point.
Penalty payments as a result of violating a labor contract exist in a lot of other businesses besides railroading. As an example, at a firm where I worked a summer job many years ago, when a limited amount of overtime is offered, it must be offered by seniority. If a senior employee turns it down, he isn't entitled to penalty payments. If a junior employee is offered and accepts the overtime without it being offered to the senior employee, a penalty payment is made to the senior employee.
I'm sure that it gets more involved when craft lines are crossed.
BaltACD schlimm jeffhergert Working for a freight railroad in train service, I was able to claim 3 basic (8 hrs/130 mile) days on top of the 160 miles for a single tour of duty once. It was the work rules and provisions of the contract that allowed that. Three of the basic days were penalty days, using us instead of calling another crew. (We were dogcatching. The contracts have changed since then. The most one could accrue now under the same circumstances is 2 days total.) I don't know what their contracts allow. Could there be fraud? Of course, but there also could be legitimate reasons for claiming the time. All our time slips and claims are all reviewed by timekeeping. I would assume theirs are too. If there was time being claimed that shouldn't be allowed, why did the timekeepers approve them? Jeff Frankly, any contract that allows this [Total for one day for one attendant = $1459.47] is an obscene abuse of the taxpayers. Obviously you have no understanding of Managements desire to violate existing labor agreements (note - the AGREEMENTS were AGREED to by both parties). Violation of specific parts of agreements have defined penalty payments. The penalties are the FAULT OF MANAGMENT, not the employees. Extenuating circumstance (manpower shortages in the moment) are the normal cause for contract violation, and under those circumstance management is more than willing to pay any price to achieve it's goal for the moment.
Management that agrees to contracts wherein many workers are paid ridiculous amounts are at fault, not the worker (unless he committed fraud).
There is NO possible rational excuse for paying a food service attendant $1500 for one day's work other than ludicrous, out-of-date contract work rules.
To answer an earlier question, an onboard service employee on no. 5 & 6 is paid only for hours worked --- not for rest time, and not for turnaround time at the away-from-home crew base.
A friend of mine was once assigned to special duty, helping one of the Amtrak Supervisors. Both of them have since left Amtrak. The Supervisor made the mistake of assuming my friend was the type of go-getter who would be willing to sacrifice his fellow workers for the sake of getting ahead in the Company. The Supervisor told my friend, "I'll show you how to break the contract". That is, engineer a situation so that the employee is seen to have broken the contract. This kind of environment leads to a "gotcha" climate where the winner is the one who best succeeds at engineering a situation so that the provisions of the contract work in his favor. The "winner" may be the Manager, or it may be the employee.
At times, Management has failed to plan ahead sufficiently to have enough trained employees available. Onboard service employees are guaranteed a certain number of hours of work (I think 180 hours) per month. After accruing a certain number of hours, that employee qualifies for overtime. Every additional hour worked during that month is paid at the overtime rate. I have known people who have been asked to make several extra round trips, and have accrued about 300 paid hours during a single month. Now imagine that a holiday falls during the period when that employee is on overtime. All those hours will be calculated as being paid for specific days.
I always valued my rest and my sanity too much to do that. I never felt that the money was worth it. Others jumped at the chance to make the big bucks. Do we blame the employee, or the employer?
A long time ago I was brought up on charges for a perceived rules violation. I was held out of service for over two months before the hearing. At the hearing, I was cleared of all charges and awarded full back pay. I don't remember exactly how that back pay was given to me, but I can imagine that it was paid in a way that might be questioned in a superficial review by the I.G.
This isn't so simple.
(edited)
Don't the OBS crew on long distance services get one day off for every day worked ? I.e a 7 day turn on a western LD train is followed by a 7 day rest period. Wouldn't that automatically make a 12 hour day a 24 hour one?. Add some overtime and 46 hours may be possible.
After a cursory look at the website of the "Free Beacon", it would appear that they published this report as part of a general anti-union editorial attitude.
Exactly. There is no way to justify or rationalise this kind of excess. It may well be legal, but in no way can it be justified. Just because it's there does not make it right.
Being from Flint, Mi., where eveyone was union, I've seen a little of what old union rules can do. Yes, the workers got what the company agreed to, but, they got it, many times, by holding a 'gun' to the company's head, (pay up or we strike and shut you down). Unions truly have done great things, but this looks like old rules overlapping and allowing excess. Having said that, if I'm on the receiving end, I'm going to do everything I legally can by contract, to make as much as I possibly can.
Bob
P.S.; Old union rules were only a part of GM's failure.
Solar:
I should remember the exact provisions of the contract, but I don't. I believe all O.B.S. employees are guaranteed 180 hours per months, assuming no mark-offs. This is all paid at straight time, no matter how many hours the employee works in a particular day. O.B.S. employees are not covered under the Hours Of Service laws. After 180 hours, there is a threshold (185? !90? I don't remember for certain). At that threshold, overtime begins and is paid for every hour above the threshold, for the rest of the month.
It is mathematically possible for an employee to put in 180 hours in about 2 weeks if Management asks him to work extra trips. Some employees have spent an entire month on the road without a single night in their own bed, In such a case, that employee is contractually entitled to overtime pay for every hour above the threshold. I know of situations where people have accrued 300 hours in a single month, although I never did it myself.
If a train runs late, it is quite possible for an O.B.S. employee to put in a full 16 hour day. If that happens when the employee is on overtime, he gets paid extra for that. If it happens on a holiday, he gets paid even more. (And he deserves it).
Remember, it doesn't happen at all unless Management asks the employee to do it in the first place.
P.S. Nobody seems willing to make an issue of the fact that O.B.S. employees routinely work 12 or more hours straight without overtime in a single day when they are under the overtime threshold. It seems that it all depends on whose ox is being gored.
I understand that men who worked in R.P.O.'s were paid no overtime if the train they were on was late--until it was late past a certain point--and this late running allowance was cumulative if it was not used.
According to Pullman Conductor William Moedinger, when it was necessary for a Pullman conductor to deadhead, he was paid for twelve hours of each twenty-four that he deadheaded. Thus, Pullman preferred that such travel be on the shortest route--but the railroads would not give space on the premium trains to non-paying passengers.
Johnny
There is nothing that will drive up individual crew compensation quicker than a crew shortage - a crew that is already on duty with a large amount of HOS time to work is a invaluable resource. It is not unheard of for that crew to come on duty and move a train out of a critical area at the on duty terminal to a 'safe spot' when the destination terminal can't handle that particular train, then be used to drag in 3 or 4 trains into the on duty terminal - getting paid a day for each train they moved.
When it comes to keeping a property fluid, you have to use the resources that are available to their maximum extent, without regard to what the individuals are being compensated. If sufficient resources had been available individual crews would have been used for each of the moves and thus individual compensation would have been a day for each crew.
The work rules and penalty payments for violations of them aren't there to enrich a few individuals. They are there to try to make it cheaper to the company, to give them incentive, to employ more people. Instead of paying one person (or crew) multiple day's pay, the idea is to use multiple people (or crews). Or to specialize along craft lines.
Even with the penalty payments (which aren't always a given, often they are denied and go through an appeal/arbitration process which can take years to be resolved) are often cheaper to the company than employing or using more employees. Plus, it makes the company look good and workers look bad to those that buy into the idea that this country has been ruined because employees (the ones in the field or factory that actually do the work) are paid too much.
jeffhergert The work rules and penalty payments for violations of them aren't there to enrich a few individuals. They are there to try to make it cheaper to the company, to give them incentive, to employ more people. Instead of paying one person (or crew) multiple day's pay, the idea is to use multiple people (or crews). Or to specialize along craft lines. Even with the penalty payments (which aren't always a given, often they are denied and go through an appeal/arbitration process which can take years to be resolved) are often cheaper to the company than employing or using more employees. Plus, it makes the company look good and workers look bad to those that buy into the idea that this country has been ruined because employees (the ones in the field or factory that actually do the work) are paid too much. Jeff
I think a lot of people (more specifically taxpayers) would argue that seating people at a table and asking for an order........probably should not be a Union "craft" with union wages or union work rules. I would start there for beginners.
ACYP.S. Nobody seems willing to make an issue of the fact that O.B.S. employees routinely work 12 or more hours straight without overtime in a single day when they are under the overtime threshold. It seems that it all depends on whose ox is being gored.
I am a little confused here. Are they hourly or salary? Hourly workers get overtime, Salary workers it is expected you work overtime for a great many employers. What is the Union contract? A combination of both?
So lets say I am Salary, it would be expected in exchange for my Salary I work overtime for a specific percentage of my normal work hours if needed. Now I agree for Holidays and impinging on vacation some additional compensation if your needed should be required.
Agree they are all stuck on a train. If that train normally runs late and Amtrak cannot get the onboard work done with an established set of employees, they should assign more and find a way to recapture the costs from the host railroad in which their train was delayed. I know that sounds overly simplified but that is what I would attempt to do.
CMSTPnP:
I think a lot of people have been misinformed about the way O.B.S. employees are paid. As I said, they get a monthly guarantee of 180 hours at straight time; then they reach a threshold where they begin to qualify for overtime.
For many years, a lot of O.B.S. employees have said that your last paragraph pretty much describes the way it should be. Here's an interesting scenario, which actually happened, although I don't remember what year. The Auto Train was seriously delayed by many hours due to a hurricane. The crew had to fall back on emergency supplies and serve extra meals and put in lots of extra hours. At the end of the trip, they had put in far more hours than their normal schedule called for. The next days's trains were then annulled. Annulments continued for several days due to hurricane damage, and the seriously delayed crew was told not to report for their next scheduled trip. The hurricane was an "Act of God", so the Company didn't have to pay those employees for their lost time. When everything got running again after the hurricane, the members of that crew resumed their regular schedule, minus the missed trip. At the end of the month, those folks didn't qualify for a dime of overtime because the lost trip cost them more hours than the hours of overtime they had put in, so they were still below the overtime threshold in spite of their grueling trip.
On my usual run, I would report for work at 12:00 noon (varies) and be on duty till 11:00 p.m., running South overnight; On duty again 5:30 a.m. till 9:30 a.m.; Lay over for a couple hours at the destination terminal; Report for work at 2:00 p.m. and work till 11:00 p.m. and return North overnight; Then work from 5:30 a.m. till 9:30 a.m. That's three days. The "normal" schedule for the first day called for an 11 hour day, and the middle day called for an interrupted 13 hour calendar day. On the last morning, your shift was 5:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m., for another 4 paid hours. Hours varied depending on the specific job. On a good trip, you might get 5 hours of sleep each night, plus an hour nap on the layover day. If a car needed to be cut out and replaced at the away-from-home terminal, the time needed to strip the car, move all stock, and set up the new car, the O.B.S. was paid for their time to do that, but that time was taken out of their layover. This was straight time every trip, for well over 20 years. I had 2 days off between trips, so it was a 5-day rotation. This was a regular, routine, every day schedule. This was not due to unforeseen delays. Delays just made it all the more trying. Meanwhile, we did our best to keep smiling.
O.B.S. employees are Union workers who work under the provisions of a contract that has many outdated and more or less ridiculous provisions. When it comes time for contract renewals, we have often asked for overtime for those long days, and we have asked for some kind of payment --- even if it is only partial --- for our held-away time at our turnaround terminal. We have known better than to expect any kind of payment for the time we are on our rest period aboard the train. At every contract negotiation, the Company has put up stiff resistance to anything like that.
A few years ago we believed the revised contract gave us some pay for our layover so we voted for it. Then the Company said certain provisions of the new contract didn't apply to the Auto Train, even though there was no wording creating such an exemption. I was an English major. I speak the language. I know what words mean. And I know that the absence of words creating an exemption means there is no exemption. Nevertheless, the "independent, unbiased" arbitrator ruled against us and in favor of the Company. That is one reason I don't necessarily trust these independent arbitrators. Maybe I am being unfair to the I.G. when I put them in the same category, but I have reason to be wary.
On those very rare occasions before I retired, when I qualified for overtime, I took the money with no apology because I had worked hard for it.
(edited for clarity)
Remember - those with an agenda - will develop 'facts' (even if they have to invent them), data and annectodes maximize their position and make the opposition, by turns, seem to be money grubbing schemers where the one extreme individual is catagorized as being everyone involved.
We have all heard of the two hour run that gets a full days pay - what doesn't get reported is that many more runs spend 12 or more hours trying to traverse the same route as that 'two hour run'. Priority runs get priority handling - there are only one or two PRIORITY trains on a territory - the other trains on the territory spend a lot of time waiting on the PRIORITY trains before they get their opportunity to run.
Perhaps Amtrak should take a look at how airlines deal with compensation for non-flying time. As I recall flight attendants are not on the clock until the plane pulls from the gate and off once it reaches the gate at destination. Layovers overnight (or even longer for some international flights) are also off the clock, but with a good accomodation allowance.
ACY,
So as the market heats up for Technical Consulting people.....
My last firm did pay time and a half for working over 40 hours even though we were Salary and he wrote that into the client contract that the client pays for it. Very surprising how many clients when they know about the penalty make sure you only work 40 hours a week.
Schlimm mentioned nice accomodations. IBM and the bigger consulting companies will tell a client " These are our agreed on lodging rates for your city when you sign a contract with us you agree to them". Had several cheap IBM clients try to stick me in a Motel 6 or some other flea bag place and all I had to do was point to that verbage in the contract.
My last consulting company allowed employees to drink company paid for Beer on Friday afternoons. Big liability there but it was used for recruiting.
IBM will grant you comp time for working on a Holiday or being called in off a vacation for emergency and it is usually at a 2 for 1 vs 1 for 1 basis. Which is nice.
Most consulting firms base the annual bonus they give out (most give bonus' still) on profit sharing in part or how the company does performance wise. I think that is something Amtrak should try and base it on Train performance that the train crews service.
Anyway, point of the larger post is that without the union and with growing competition in the IT industry I get similar benefits as if I were in a union. Just for competitive reasons not union contract reasons.
On the IT side we get paid for weather cancellations of work. We also get paid if say we are on a government contract and Newt Gingrinch shuts the government down. So I think in this respect Amtrak should adopt that as well. Acts of God as they are called should be no fault and the employees should not be penalized for them, IMO. So I agree that the Amtrak contracts need modernization because on the benefit side your missing out on some benefits that the professional IT side gets.
Also, when I ran my restaurant and it closed for weather, I still paid the employees. If it closed due to equipment malfunction, I would trim the staff but still keep a core of paid employees on the payroll for that day or those hours. It's just stupid to use those issues as a reason to cut costs.
schlimm Perhaps Amtrak should take a look at how airlines deal with compensation for non-flying time. As I recall flight attendants are not on the clock until the plane pulls from the gate and off once it reaches the gate at destination. Layovers overnight (or even longer for some international flights) are also off the clock, but with a good accomodation allowance.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.