Rail Carriers’ outright rejection of Rail Labor’s proposals.

Rail Carriers’ outright rejection of Rail Labor’s proposed ‘ground rules’ derails negotiations

WASHINGTON, D.C., March 11 – The second bargaining session over changes in wages and work rules of the national rail carriers concluded prematurely on March 9 when the National Carriers Conference Committee (NCCC), representing the Class One carriers, refused to entertain or even discuss ground rules for negotiations proposed by the Rail Labor Bargaining Coalition (RLBC), representing seven rail unions comprised of 85,000 rail workers. The RLBC proposed the ground rules after questions regarding the bargaining process were raised at the first negotiating session, held 1/24/2005. At yesterday’s meeting, the rail carriers’ chief negotiator, Robert Allen, said, “There will be no ground rules for these negotiations.”

“By refusing to even discuss the Rail Labor Coalition’s proposed ground rules, the rail carriers have gotten these negotiations off on the wrong track,” said George Francisco, coordinator of the Coalition and President of the National Conference of Firemen & Oilers (SEIU). “These ground rules are an attempt to clarify the process in which seven rail unions are bargaining in concert.”

The proposed Ground Rules simply covered the following eight issues:

– Who each side represented;

– Who would participate in negotiations;

– The advance notification of presentations by experts;

– The scheduling of negotiations;

– The alignment of common and craft-specific issues so the suitable representatives would be available;

– Mutually agreeing upon negotiation locations and provisions for bargaining and caucus rooms and the sharing of expenses;

– Provisions for information sharing and confidentiality agreements; and

– The finalization of contract language and the process for the ratification of the contract by the members of the coalition.

“Since the

Ding. End of round 1. Or cite your favorite sports analogy. It will be a long fight or season.

I note the UTU isn’t in the Union Group.

Jay

Yes,

How could fellows working so close, allow their leadership to stray to the point where the UTU is not part of a rail coalition. At first glance It might have to do with belt-packs and remote control.

Its funny, you can visit both union web sites, and read politicaly common goals. Yet management has seemed to devide and stomp them to different camps! SAD.

Jim - Lawton, NV

I noted there was no source given for the “press release”.

Dave H.

The carriers do not want a negotiated settlement. They want an impasse, a cooling off period under Taft-Hartley and then a contract based entirely on the carriers Section 6 demands imposed by a Bush appointed Presidential Emergency Board.

Alan

And what is the big deal! Oh, you want the release done by some managment controled media source. This was relaeased by a union.

We, in labor are turning back the clock, management you got us against the wall, WE ARE COMING OUT FIGHTING…During the past twenty five years, our wages have not kept up with inflation. We’re done with this agenda!

Its strange, as labor suffers, and our wifes were put to work to pick up the slack in the family budget, yet we continued to lose economic ground, our company leaders went from earning a 6 time multipler to earning a 100 time multipler and in many situation are now earning 300 times a workers wage.

No longer are US in the transportation industry going to support cheap services, its over. You hurt anyone, we will go after you in spades!

Yep, its a line in the sand. NO smooth media type is going to be able justify anything, we are now on the hunt!

Jim - Lawton, NV MP236

OK, you got your Taft-Harley and you got your Railway Labor Act. I believe that TH doesn’t have anything to do with Railway labor.

Since national railroad strikes are quickly deemed to “imperil the national health” and “railroads are necessary for the national security” Taft-Hartley is used in railroad labor strife. It is hated by labor and puts a bias into the process.

http://www.news.uiuc.edu/biztips/00/09tafthartley.html

PEB link:

http://www.nmb.gov/mediation/pebothr.html

The process:

http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/955

Within our contract, the National Master Freight Agreement, we reserved our right to strike. In black and white its spelled out. We will back our brothers and sisters of the BLET and their agreements with other unions.

Corporate exploiters, you will bargain in good faith with this coalition, or your do-dads will not find there way to you! We are united in solidarity with the BLET and its brothers and sisters and their coalition members.

Jim - Lawton, NV MP 236

if it goes to the PEB…labor is screwed…you never ever want your contract to be settled by the PEB!!!
csx engineer

You know, most of us are just having fun, then you bring in that PEB, shoot! I’m running! And I thought you were a brother…

Just goes to show you, that you can’t trust anyone from the south, they always have some hidden agenda that has nothing to do with the brotherhood of Labor! Agents for the PEB they are!

On a serious note, arbitration most times works out A-OK except for those liers from SC, or is it NC!

Jim - Lawton, NV MP236

First of all the Taft Hartley Act has nothing to do with Railway Labor disputes. It governs other industries. The Railway Labor Act governs Railway Labor matters as is noted in both the NMB and FRA links you discuss. As set forth in the FRA link, the standard for the President to employ a PEB is :

"If the NMB determines that the dispute threatens “substantially to interrupt interstate commerce to a degree such as to deprive any section of the country of essential transportation service”

As you can see this is substantially different from the standard under Taft Hartley in your first link.

LC

You know, I think what I’m trying to say here is that there really is a botherhood of labour. What the feds may state as against, mite not be so.

Jim - Lawton, NV MP 236

what? im lost…what are you trying to say?
csx engineer

Doesn’t the U.S do any collective bargaining? Any mediation and arbitration?

It doesn’t sound like a whole lot of balanced negotiations between unions and management teams goes on over there.

Yup. Lets all come out fighting…

Do you really think the union fatcats care about us at the bottom of the pyramid??!
Look at the UTU. I’m sure Boyd and company were much more into lining their pockets than they were about representing the working man…that is why they ended up in the big house… Pretty much everybody else has run to the Teamsters, paragon of virtue that they are…LOL… thanks, but I’ll believe that they will actually advance my agenda when I see it…and it hasn’t happened yet…

Ever try to get help from a General Chairman or even many Local Chairmen?? Don’t hold your breath…

Sorry, not much there that makes it worth fighting for. Certainly nothing I want to strike over or have to feed my family on some other BS job while I wait for others who decided they just had to be hotheads…

LC

csx-e -

In case you haven’t noticed he is insulting you because you don’t agree with all his views…

Kind of, if they won’t join you, beat them up. I wouldn’t pay him much mind. He probably is one of those crew room loudmouths, you know about 2 years on the job, but KNOWS it ALL…

LC

Ignore the slogans. Railroads and their labor organizations operate under the Railway Labor Act. Its passage 80 years ago set up the first legislation demanding mediation. The government did not want railroad strikes after the long shopmen’s strike. Their has not been a long national railroad strike in the US in the last 80 years and there won’t be this time. Everone will huff and puff, a mediation panel will make a recomendation and Congress will tell everyone to take the mediators recomendation. All of the parties at the negotiating table know where this train will terminate. In a Congress curently controlled by the Republicans. Of well, next time the Brothers should get out there and vote early and often.

It just seems that Canadian labour law and U.S labour law seem to differ in that Canadian labour law is more fair then U.S. Of course if you are not familiar with Canadian labour law as I am not with U.S labour law, it’s difficult to make an accurate comparison.

man oh man limited…what the hell is going on around here anymore…who let all the nut cases in!!! evey other tread is some blow hard or some cry baby… and god forbid you dont agree with them…and you cant reason with them… i tried that in the montana complaining farms thread… nothing sinks in…thier brain is so full of crap its hard to talk to them…let alone try and carry on a resonable conversation…
csx engineer