WHEREAS, at the request of AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, the BLE entered into good-faith discussions with the UTU to attempt to amicably resolve our differences, and after the most serious deliberations, consented to move forward on the basis of the Statement of Principles adopted by the Advisory Board on November 23, 1998; and,
WHEREAS, those good-faith discussions led to the potential to create a new union in which we would preserve our craft and strengthen our ranks against the rail carriers in the next round of collective bargaining; and,
WHEREAS, critical outstanding issues, chief among them being finances, had to be resolved in a timely manner in order for the documents to be drafted and submitted to BLE members so they could make an informed decision by October 1 of this year; and,
WHEREAS, the Joint Finance Committee created to resolve the difficult financial questions was given a deadline of May 1 to report its conclusions and recommendations, in order to meet the October 1 ratification vote date; and,
WHEREAS, the Advisory Board considers the UTU's reluctance to address its true financial position in a forthright and timely manner to be a material breach of the Statement of Principles; and,
WHEREAS, without that critical financial information, it is impossible to determine whether a proposed new union can continue the same level of services, nor that it can be done in a fiscally prudent and responsible manner, nor that BLE members will be protected from any liabilities that the UTU now has, or could incur; and,
WHEREAS, it is quickly becoming impossible for the necessary documents to be created in time for BLE members to have an informed choice available to them by October 1; and,
WHEREAS, the BLE must prepare for a difficult fight with the carriers in the fast-approaching next round of collective bargaining, which will affect our members' standard of living and quality of life, concerns that are paramount to all BLE members; and,
WHEREAS, our attention and energy should be devoted to preparation for bargaining with the carriers, working cooperatively with all of rail labor and other union allies; and,
WHEREAS, the UTU has failed to provide the essential financial information by the May 1 deadline; therefore,
IT IS RESOLVED, because of UTU's refusal to provide critical financial information, all discussions by the Joint Drafting Committee should be and hereby are terminated this eighth day of May, 1999, and because of this breach, the Advisory Board rescinds it approval of the Statement of Principles. The BLE members of the Oversight Committee are instructed to so inform the appropriate UTU officials, BLE members and all other parties involved with or having an interest in these talks.
Following the Advisory Board's May 8 decision to end unifcation talks with the United Transportation Union, several important actions were put into motion that could decide the future of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers.
On May 11, the UTU resubmitted its petition to the National Mediation Board to eliminate the craft of locomotive engineer, conductor and brakeman. If approved, the aforementioned crafts would be combined into a single class of "train and engine service employee." The craft and title of lcomotive engineer, which has been around for more than 150 years, would be eliminated. Preliminary NMB hearings on the matter have been scheduled for July 12.
This position is an outright contradiction to the Statement of Principles the UTU signed with the BLE, in which the UTU agreed to preserve distinct craft lines within the proposed new union.
The UTU is also asking for a representation election on the Union Pacific property to force workers of this proposed new craft to choose only one labor union to represent them.
Such an election wouldn't be limited to just the BLE and UTU -- any union would be able to participate. But with a 3-to-2 ratio of UTU to BLE voters on UP, the odds would be stacked heavily in the UTU's favor.
If less than 50 percent of eligible voters return ballots, then there would be no union representation at all for UP train crew workers. This would leave them vulnerable to the whims of the carrier and give workers no recourse to challenge management decisions or protect their rights under the Railway Labor Act.
NMB rules dictate that if less than 50 percent of eligible voters cast ballots in an election of this kind, then the lack of interest results in "no union." It would be at least two years before another union could seek to represent the workers.
END OF PAGE 2