Editor's Note: As benchmark deadlines approach, membership discussion throughout the BLE continues over the "Statement of Principles" reached with the UTU in November of 1998. We interviewed BLE President Clarence Monin again this month for his reaction and comments on the most frequently asked questions.
Newsletter: Members are asking, as the year progresses, how much will they be involved in this process of negotiations and developing a new constitution for the proposed new union? In fact, just how important is rank-and-file involvement at all?
President Monin: "Members are the lifeblood of any union, but especially so for the BLE our democratic traditions are deeply ingrained in all of us, probably more so than any other union. That makes membership involvement and participation absolutely vital to every thing that we do, particularly on issues as important as this one is to the future of the BLE.
"Since information is critical to meaningful involvement, we're making every effort to meet with members in as many divisions as possible, to explain the issues in detail, to make sure everyone knows exactly what's at stake here and how we got to this point and what our options are. Our Special Reps have been asked to make presentations at dozens of divisions. I've visited divisions from Baltimore to Chicago to St. Louis... all over the country.
"We're not a 'top-down' operation. Our strength is from the rank-and-file
on up. From my experience, that's the only way you can ask people to stand
up together in solidarity with you. Which means listening to what members
have to say, to hear their concerns first-hand, is terribly important, too.
"We've all been doing that because, whatever we do, we need to march as one. I'd like to get a negotiated agreement done, on schedule, with the UTU that protects our craft and our voice, but the issues are difficult and sensitive, the process itself is fragile.
"We engaged in this process in the first place to give our members the right to choose an alternative to an out-and-out, immediate and expensive fight over representation at a time when we were at a tremendous disadvantage. Hopefully, we'll have a product at the end of the day our members can vote up or down. But it's a long way from here to there. Anything could happen at any time. So it's critical, at every stage, that members participate, probe, keep informed, stay involved."
Newsletter: Members have heard you warn before that there are sensitive issues that must be addressed along the way, like the new union's proposed finances that report is due soon. Members want to know if agreement will be reached on that, by the May 1 deadline, or will it go to arbitration as the "Principles" call for?
Monin: "No question it's one of the most difficult issues, which I said from the get-go that could cause everything to break down. In fact, there has been some delay in getting all the facts together and analyzed, so while we may go some beyond May 1, we won't be ready to invoke the arbitration process. We're nowhere near that stage, yet."
Newsletter: What does that mean for the process? What are the particular issues that you think are creating obstacles?
Monin: "Anytime you take two different unions with different cultures, different financial structures, different dues or income structures, you've got a whole host of thorny problems that need to be explored, thought through carefully.
"This area ranks among the most extremely fragile of all the areas that we've got to cover. Let me stress right away that there would be no dues increase for BLE members that's not an issue. The problems stem more from the differences in how the two unions' finances and income are structured. Whether or not they can be resolved is an open question, one on which this whole effort could very well founder.
"But we've said all along that the new organization must maintain the level of services that we now provide, be prudently financed and that we will not be responsible for any liabilities that UTU might have. We're sticking to those principles.
"I believed this would be the most difficult of all the tasks we faced and it has been. And it shows just how important it's been to follow the careful process we laid out last November one that called for a complete and thorough review of this complicated subject."
Newsletter: With that report still hanging out there, it makes this next question even more important some members are still not clear on why we've gone through this process. Can you explain the purpose for the BLE trying to negotiate a unification agreement with the UTU in the first place?
President Monin: "I'd like to say there never was a serious threat to our craft and our union, but the hard truth is that that's exactly what confronted us in January of 1998. The petition filed with the National Mediation Board, the federal agency that has jurisdiction over rail unions, would have immediately and for all time wiped out our craft. We would then have faced a representation election on the UP/SP, where we were out-numbered by the UTU's 12,000 members to our 8,000. Had an election been called as quickly as some projected, our members could have been overwhelmed before they even caught their breath.
"Thanks to our allies in other transportation unions and at the AFL-CIO whose Constitution forbids this kind of raiding we were able to stop any action from taking place at that time. At the request of AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, we began talks with the UTU to identify our differences and to see, in good faith, whether or not there was a way to resolve those differences. We did not begin this process with the idea of negotiating a unification agreement that could lead to a new union.
"But those talks gave us an opportunity to develop an alternative course of action for our members to choose from one that didn't exist in January of 1998. Those talks, of course, resulted in the 'Statement of Principles.'
"We stuck to our word and made a very strong good faith effort in our discussions with UTU all in the context of protecting our craft and, at the same time, approaching the larger threat of confronting the carriers both in our daily struggles with them and in the negotiations coming up later this year.
"Ultimately, that's our real problem. Every day that goes by the carriers get stronger, with all the mergers and consolidation in the industry. No matter what happens with the unification effort with the UTU, we still have that challenge hanging out there.
"So we've turned this threat to our craft around and into an attempt to create a choice for the membership and an opportunity to begin the process of unifying rail labor. Even if this particular attempt does not get us where we need to be in confronting the carriers, then we'll still need to keep looking for another way. We have to. For our very survival as a craft... to improve our members' quality of life."
Newsletter: What other ways are there for developing rail unity? That's a question and a concern a lot of members have raised.
President Monin: "I'm an optimist. I'll keep working at this unification effort as long as it makes sense and holds out hope and opportunity for our members. At the time we confronted last year's threat to our craft, there were no other options, other than losing, and I don't consider that an option.
"But if we have to confront a new reality, we will. Our Advisory Board established a committee to explore the possibility of other potential partners, not so much in the event of failure with this effort, but more to be prepared and find ways to increase our strength in the on-going struggle with the carriers no matter what happens.
"Look, I've been an engineer all my working life. Dedicated to this union. Fought for this membership. I intend to keep focused on our main goals: protecting our craft, building a stronger union, uniting rail labor, standing up to the carriers, fighting for all of our members.
"No one can tell you what the future holds. But I can tell you that we can confront its challenges, successfully, if we use those goals as our guideposts in the weeks and months ahead.
"In the short time we've been operating under the 'Statement of Principles' with the UTU, we've gotten a glimpse of what unity can produce. The fatigue agreement signed with the carriers last month was a solid, tangible product of a united effort. Just one example of what labor solidarity can achieve.
"If we stand together united as BLE members first then I suspect that spirit of solidarity itself will become a magnet for others who understand what it can accomplish. I believe there will be no shortage of new opportunities opening up. Meantime, it's important to see if we can still work through the details with the UTU under the 'Statement of Principles' we've already got in hand."
THAMESVILLE, Ont. -- Investigators are blaming an improperly positioned switch for the April 23 derailment of a VIA Rail passenger train that killed two BLE members and injured 100 passengers.
Brother W.D. "Don" Blain, a member of Division 747 (Mimico, Ont.) was the lead engineer of train #74. Brother Blain, 45, joined the BLE on June 1, 1984. He is survived by his wife, Susan, and son Paul.
Engineer Trainee Kevin Richard Lihou, 34, was also a member of Division 747. Brother Lihou leaves behind his wife, Liz, and two daughters, Victoria and Jacquelyn.
The accident could have been much worse. Another VIA passenger train, #71, was speeding down the same track and was on a collision course with train #74. After receiving a last-second call from Brothers Blain and Lihou, train #71 stopped a few hundred feet short of the accident scene. Blain and Lihou will be remembered as heroes for preventing a major disaster.
At 1500 hours on Thursday, April 29, all train movement in Canada was stopped to observe a minute of silence for the BLE's two fallen Brothers. The stoppage was requested by BLE Canadian Director Gilles Hallé.
"This gesture showed the true solidarity of the Brotherhood to all railroads and to other unions," Canadian Director Hallé said.
Dazed passengers were hauled from the mangled wreckage into a cold drizzle as the two bodies lay trapped under the locomotive, which flipped onto its side after the crash.
The coach car immediately behind the engine was sitting at a 45-degree angle, making it difficult for people to scramble to safety. There were fears that it too would topple over during the frantic evacuation.
Fertilizer from one of the crumbled tank cars spilled out across the tracks, threatening to combine with diesel fuel and cause a violent explosion. Most passengers walked away with minor cuts and bruises. About 100 were taken to the hospital.
The cause of the crash was not immediately known but police and witnesses said a switch had been left open.
There have been several other fatal train wrecks in Canada this decade. In September 1997, a Via transcontinental train derailed near Biggar, Sask., killing one person and injuring 78. In August 1996, 20 boxcars rolled downhill from railyards in Edson, Alta., and hit oncoming freight train, killing three people.
Four people died in February 1992 when a trailer truck skidded onto a level crossing and collided with a Via Rail train about 40 kilometres west of Montreal. And in August 1991, a CN Rail freight train crashed into an oil tanker truck in Kinsella, Alta., killing the truck driver and three train crew members.
END OF PAGE 4