BNSF, the railroad owned by Warren Buffett, has sent this letter to Congress urging them to pass legislation that would force rail workers to adopt a contract that contains ZERO paid or unpaid sick days.
In the letter, BNSF continues to lie about its sick leave policy.
You’d be amazed at the number of businesses of all sizes that don’t offer sick leave.
How many penalize workers for taking time off at all? Other than not getting paid.
Slaves get penalized.
While there’s no details yet that I’ve seen, supposedly there’s changes to allow medical related time off to not be counted against an employee. I would imagine some type of documentation will be needed.
Before, at least for us, the policy didn’t care if you had documentation or not. It was up to the railroad to decide to ding you on attendance or not. And the decision was made not locally, where local officials knew their people, but a manager removed from the workforce at a central location where a name was just a faceless ID number. Easier to be heartless that way.
I never understood how they thought they could win before an arbitrator who would ask. “You dismissed this employee for going to the doctor?”
Jeff
See what Zug posted about the tentative BLET agreement:
https://ble-t.org/news/blet-smart-td-reach-tentative-agreement-with-railroads/
As always - The Devil will be in the details.
And how the companies decide to “interperet” those details.
I remember some stuff when the 6/48, 7/72 stuff came out.
And how those interperted ‘details’ get hammered out in blacksmith’s shop of discipline appeals through HR, Arbitration and the Public Law Board.
It sounds like some of the details are still to be negotiated. Things like self-protecting pools, changes in how pools and extra boards are regulated for staffing and the automated bid scheduling.
We have been working on a local agreement for “smart rest” with the carrier. I learned at our last union meeting that the 3 page proposal that was submitted has returned as a 7 page proposal with most of the above items included. Items which I, and some others who follow this (most have focused on just the big items, pay, health, and attendance) don’t really want.
I suspect those items will eventually be forced to binding arbitration which means the railroads will probably get them. Especially because some railroads and at least one location on my company have some of this already in place.
We’ll see what the full contract language is.
Jeff
I have zero faith that this will be a better contract.
Just pushed until after the election when the political people won’t give 2 craps.
I understand that Union members are currently reviewing the new contract offer, and will vote to decide whether or not to accept it. Are they free to hold the vote any time? If they are, and if they vote to reject the offer; are they then free to go on strike immediately upon rejecting the offer?
They Have not released details yet. It’s still being reviewed at the international level and should be out to members sometime next week.
Posts om various social media are all up in arms and they don’t know any details except on pay and health and welfare issues. Even there only the basics have been released.
If rejected, I would expect there would be some time, 48 to 72 hours, before a strike would be called. Possibly if the procedures to voting and counting the vote goes fast, they might use the deadline the IAM stated, Sept 29. The time would allow more negotiations, but more importantly, give the locals of SMART-TD and divisions of BLE&T time to prepare. Some are prepared (we are except the signs aren’t put together) and some are not.
Jeff
Jeff,
I understand they are not releasing details yet as to what they will do once they understand the new agreement. But what I am basically asking is whether they have the right to strike if they decide they don’t want to accept the agreement. Or is there some government mandate in place that would prevent or delay a strike from being carried out?
My question is essentially this:
Is there a possibility that a strike will be executed prior to the Midterms?
If the answer is yes, is there the possibility that such a strike could be stopped by the Government after being executed?
Yes, the agreement is only tentative and needs to be voted on via the membership if the membership rejects the agreement the conditions for a strike resume.
Okay thanks. Is there any cooling off period now that would delay voting to strike? Is there any government authority that could override a strike and order strikers to return to work?
Congress always has the authority to intervene if an agreement can’t be reached. Preemptive, like the attempt earlier in the week, or after a strike/lock out happens.
It probably depends on how much lead time there is after the rejection.
At this point the Railway Labor Act has run it’s course. There is a provision for a second PEB to be called, but I believe a strike/lock out has to happen first. The parties who can request one are also limited. I don’t have my reference with me, but i think it’s both parties to the dispute and state governors. Most likely congress would act before another PEB is requested.
Jeff