Engineer TG Roberts Seniority - Houston Hub

From: Gil Gore [mailto:gilgore@bletsr.org] Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 4:44 PM To: All Houston Hub Local Chairmen

Subject: Engineer TG Roberts Seniority

Brothers,

Attached is a copy of an executed agreement concerning the seniority of Engineer T. G. Roberts in the Houston Hub. Engineer Roberts has provided the necessary documentation to substantiate his military service to our country which prevented him from bidding on a bulletin for engine service. He will therefore in accordance with law and agreement be placed on all Houston Hub seniority rosters between Engineers JK Battles and DL Wooten to properly restore seniority. (Click HERE to view a copy of the Agreement in PDF format)

Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact me.

Fraternally,

Gil Gore

Trip Rates Ft. Worth - Halsted - Sweetwater - Odessa

September 08, 2006

1820.70 6)

MR G L GORE

GENERAL CHAIRMAN BLE

1448 MACATHUR AVE

HARVEY LA 70058

Dear Sir:

Pursuant to Article V, Section 9 of the 2003 BLET National Agreement, the trip-rate for the following runs/pools shall become effective on September 16, 2006

RUNS/POOLS	ENGINEER TRIP RATE
Sweetwater – Odessa (RE51)	$187.07
Ft. Worth – Halsted (RE66)	$382.64

Should you have any additional questions or concerns in this matter, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, T. Gary Taggart

Director - Labor Relations

FW: DISCIPLINE ALERT: SSI Item #10, Rule 6.32.2

From: Thomas Frederick [mailto:t.frederick@comcast.net]
Subject: DISCIPLINE ALERT: SSI Item #10, Rule 6.32.2

Brothers & Sisters:

Recently, a crew was subjected to an FTX in which the testing managers turned off the external power source for a road crossing at grade, to test the crew’s reaction and compliance with SSI Item #10, Rule 6.32.2. This SSI revision states the following (in pertinent part):

6.32.2 Automatic Warning Device
Application:

Report malfunctioning automatic crossing warning devices to the train dispatcher or to the Grade Crossing Safety Hot Line (800-848-8715) by the first available means of communication. If equipped, when the white power-on light on the exterior of the signal house is not lit, or when a strobe light on the exterior of the signal house is flashing, immediately notify the train dispatcher or Grade Crossing Safety Hot Line.

In the instant case, with the external power source disabled, the signal house light was no longer illuminated and the crossing gates operated much slower than “normal”, because they were operating on battery power. The crew did not contact the train dispatcher or the Grade Crossing Safety Hotline as required by the rule, and they were issued an Act 2 (conferencing handled on the ground). Because of the potential for serious ramifications and repercussions of malfunctioning crossing warning devices, the Carrier has embarked upon this test as a way to measure knowledge and compliance with the rule. Count on this test being conducted system-wide. These lights are also installed on BNSF crossings, so count on this same test being conducted on that property as well.

Be observant for this light at grade crossings. They aren’t very big, and some are brighter than others. A tell-tale sign that the crossing warning devices are functioning on battery power will be slower than normal operation of the gate arms. Special vigilance should be taken during periods of reduced visibility (fog, heavy rain, etc.), and during stormy conditions when high winds may have caused local power outages. Contact the train dispatcher if you see a signal light not illuminated. Follow-up by calling the Grade Crossing Safety Hotline to report the defect, and ask for a response to the report.

Work Safely.

Tom Frederick

FW: Final Rule Use of Locomotive Horns at Grade Crossings

From: Gil Gore [mailto:gilgore@bletsr.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 2:19 PM To: All Local Chairmen BLET UP Southern Region GCA

Subject: Final Rule Use of Locomotive Horns at Grade Crossings

Brothers,

Attached you will find communications from Brother John Tolman VP-NLR of BLET providing notification of the final rule regarding horn sounding at grade crossings.

Attached you will find the following documents (Click on the hyperlinks below to view documents in PDF)

1. 08-29-06 Letter from VP-NLR Tolman (5358 Tolman – All Concerned 08-29-06.pdf)

2. Synopsis of CFR 222.21 – 222.25 – and 222.27 downloaded from FRA Website (CFR 222-21-25-27.pdf)

3. Summary of Changes to CFR 222 – 229 (Summary Changes 222 – 229.pdf)

4. Copy of the actual Regulation (CFR 222 – 229 Final Rule Horn 08-17-06.pdf)

I have also pasted a copy of the Synopsis below for your easy reference. Please be sure to read the disclaimer provided by FRA in the Summary.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Fraternally,

Gil Gore

Disclaimer: This summary of changes in the amended final rule is for informational purposes only. Entities subject to the rule should refer to the rule text as published in the Federal Register on August 17, 2006. Should any portion of this summary conflict with the rule, the language of the rule shall govern.

Summary of Major Changes in the Amended Train Horn Final Rule

Locomotive Horn Sounding • The compliance date of the time-based locomotive horn sounding requirements has been extended to December 15, 2006. (Please refer to section 222.21(b) for more information.) • The locomotive horn must be sounded in a time-based manner at private and pedestrian crossings, if State law requires locomotive horn sounding at these crossings. (Please refer to sections 222.25 and 222.27 for more information.) • A “good faith” exception has been added to the 20-second maximum locomotive horn sounding requirement for locomotive engineers who are unable to precisely estimate their time of arrival at an upcoming grade crossing. (Please refer to section 222.21(b) for more information.) • An exception to the 15-second minimum locomotive horn sounding requirement has been added to the final rule for trains that resume movement after having been stopped in close proximity to a public highway-rail grade crossing. (Please refer to section 222.21(d) for more information.)

Locomotive Audible Warning Devices • Locomotive audible warning devices (other than the locomotive horn) must be sounded in a time-based manner at public, private and pedestrian crossings, if State law requires the sounding of locomotive audible warning devices at these crossings. (Please refer to sections 222.21(e), 222.25, and 222.27 for more information.)

Quiet Zone Notification Requirements • The public authority must provide a Notice of Intent before submitting an application for FRA approval of a quiet zone. (Please refer to section 222.39(b) for more information.) • Pre-Rule Quiet Zones and Pre-Rule Partial Quiet Zones: The public authority must submit a Notice of Intent by February 24, 2008 and a detailed plan for quiet zone improvements by June 24, 2008, in order to prevent the resumption of locomotive horn sounding on June 24, 2008. (Please refer to section 222.41(c) for more information.)

Locomotive Horn Sound Level Requirements • Locomotives used in rapid transit operations on the general railroad system are exempt from the locomotive horn sound level and testing requirements contained in section 229.129. (Please refer to section 229.129(d) for more information.) • The compliance deadline for sound level testing of new locomotives has been extended to September 18, 2006. (Please refer to section 229.129(b) for more information.) • The test site parameters for locomotive horn sound level testing have been revised. (Please refer to section 229.129(c)(5) for more information.) • The requirement to record air flow measurements taken during locomotive horn sound level testing has been removed. (Please refer to section 229.129(c)(10) for more information.) • The final rule has been revised to address sound level testing of replacement locomotive horns. (Please refer to section 229.129(b)(4) for more information.)

Trip Rate Meeting San Antonio - 07-27-06 - Data Analysis

From: Gil Gore [mailto:thegores1@cox.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 10:39 AM To: All BLET Local Chairmen UP Southern Region Subject: FW: Trip Rate Meeting San Antonio - 07-27-06 - Data Analysis

Brothers,

Attached is the data presented by the Carrier during our trip rate meeting in San Antonio (Click HERE to view PDF). This data covers the Houston to Livonia (B372 RE47 Pool). The fact that three crews were identified as having been paid combined miles for their deadhead after the service portion of their trip, works against our position in this dispute. Those earnings were included as a single trip in the trip rate data. If there is a record of consistently handling the pools in that fashion, we will have a steep hill to climb. Below is my response to that information and meeting. Absent resolution within the next couple of weeks, we are going to forward this issue to the disputes committee for resolution as provided in Article V, Part B, Section 6 of the BLET 2003 National Agreement as quoted below:

Section 6 - National Disputes Committee A National Disputes Committee (“Disputes Committee”) is established for the purpose of resolving any disputes that may arise under this Article. Such Committee shall consist of the President of the BLE and the Chairman of the NCCC, and a neutral Chairman selected by the parties or, absent agreement, appointed by the National Mediation Board. Each partisan member may select others to serve on the Committee at his discretion. If the partisan members of the Committee are unable to agree on resolution of any dispute within ten (10) days after convening, the matter will be referred to the neutral Chairman for resolution. The neutral Chairman will resolve the dispute within ten (10) days after referral of the matter. Each party shall bear its own costs and shall equally share the fees and expenses of the neutral. Any resolution by the Committee or by the neutral shall be final and binding and shall be enforceable and reviewable under Section 3 of the Railway Labor Act. Discussions are ongoing and I will keep you posted regarding referring this to the disputes Committee for resolution.

In the meantime, it is imperative that we keep a record of crews that performed work and terminal to terminal deadheads during this dispute period. If you would download a KBM for your respective pools with the N (Name) function, it will list all employees both regular and extra that worked your pools during this dispute and will be helpful in identifying any shortages for these trips. It is essential that every member keep all of his payroll records and tie up sheets so that we can guarantee proper payments if this issue is resolved in our favor. Additionally, if there are any members who have their payroll data during the test period (July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003) where they were deadheaded terminal to terminal separate and apart from service in connection with a work event, please have them forward that information to our office immediately. I have attached a shortage sheet that you can distribute to our members so that they can keep track of the trips where they have performed service associated with a terminal to terminal deadhead and not been paid two trip rates (Click HERE to get a PDF). Fraternally, Gil Gore From: Gil Gore [mailto:thegores1@cox.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 10:00 AM To: 'TGTAGGAR@up.com' Cc: 'epruitt@eatel.net'; Mike Futhey (mbfuthey@bellsouth.net); 'tjutu27@hotmail.com'; 'go577@prodigy.net'; 'Russell R. Elley'; 'GL Perrien'; 'Dave Phillips'; 'frankatamisiea@up.com'; 'alweed@up.com' Subject: Trip Rate Meeting San Antonio - 07-27-06 - Data Analysis

Gary,

After meeting with you in San Antonio on Thursday, August 27, 2006 I have reviewed the data that you have presented. While I know that I have formally raised my objection to this dispute verbally, please note that this Committee takes great exception to Union Pacific’s position on the terminal to terminal deadhead application. I would like to review the data you presented. For the sake of reference, I have numbered the 6 trips you have identified and the pages of the supporting documentation (Exhibit A). I would like to review each trip you have provided.

Trip #	Date	Name – Miles	Explanation	Comments
#1	06-22-03	LR Jeanlouis – 399 miles – pages 6 – 9	Called out of Livonia TB114 and transported to B544 Kinder to get train QBLLI – 20 and work back to Livonia then deadhead to B372 Houston	Crew was paid miles transported for service and 243 mile deadhead. WORK HISTORY DOES NOT SHOW COMBINED DEADHEAD
#2	01-18-03	WW Biddle – 389 miles – pages 2 – 5	Called out of Livonia TB114 and transported to B570 to get train QBTLI – 18 and worked same back to Livonia – Then transported from TB114 to B610 to get second train QBTLI – 17 worked back into TB114 (Livonia) then deadheaded from TB114 to Houston combined with service	Crew was paid combined service deadhead 243 miles back to Houston. Work history shows combined with service
#3	07-26-03	GA Lewis – 385 miles – pages 10 – 11	No FRA report provided – Comments indicate went on duty at Livonia took train to B544 Kinder (77 miles) – took train B544 to Alexandria C625 (60 miles) transported C625 to Houston B372 (248 miles)	Crew was paid miles transported and worked. WORK HISTORY DOES NOT SHOW COMBINED DEADHEAD.
#4	10-18-02	AE Neimeyer – 377 miles – pages 12 – 15	Called out of Houston B372 – transported to Hardy Street LS368 (10 miles) LS368 to B382 Settegast Jct – (10 miles) Work Train ALDLI – 17 to Livonia – transport Lafayette (296 miles) – no rooms in Lafayette – transported to Baton Rouge (50 miles) – no rooms Baton Rouge – transported to Port Allen (11 miles). Total 377 miles	Trip does not involve terminal to terminal deadhead. Crew used Houston – Livonia – Lafayette – Baton Rouge – Port Allen in straight away service
#5	03-24-03	DL Monroe – 375 miles – pages 16 – 19	Worked train IGSAT5 – 24 from B372 Houston to TB114 Livonia – transported for reposition to Alexandria under Side Letter 1 Houston Hub Agreement.	Trip does not involve terminal to terminal deadhead Crew used in straight away service Houston – Livonia and repositioned to Alexandria per Side Letter 1.
#6	10-02-02	WJ Howard – 373 miles – pages 21 – 22	Crew repositioned from LS609 Lafayette to TB114 Livonia per side letter 1 and worked train INOLBR – 02 from TB114 Livonia to B372 Houston	Trip does not involve terminal to terminal deadhead. Crew repositioned per Side Letter 1 from Lafayette to Livonia and worked train Livonia to Houston.

As you can see by the above bold denoted trips, three of the six trips (#’s 4 – 5 – 6) provided do not have anything to do with the use of crews deadheaded terminal to terminal after performing service. Additionally, Exhibit A page 23 lists a group of trips that were paid two trips in the same calendar day. I have numbered those trips (7-19) for ease of reference and provided an explanation for the same.

Trip #	Date	Name	Explanation	Comments
7	02-19-03 MPBBT-18	RE Partridge – 248 miles on train 8 hours Separate and apart deadhead – page 24	Crew deadheaded Separate and apart from Service B372 Houston to C625 Alexandria and worked train back from Alexandria to Houston	Shows crews were deadheaded separate and apart from service terminal to terminal connected with service during the test period.
8	07-09-02 MNPEW-07	LR Punch – 248 miles on train 8 hours Separate and apart deadhead – page 25	Crew worked train B372 – C625 and then deadheaded Separate and apart from service back to B372 Houston	Shows crews were deadheaded separate and apart from service terminal to terminal connected with service during the test period.
9	07-08-02 GSCOHO-05	RJ Stutes – 248 miles on train 8 housr Separate and apart deadhead – page 26	Crew deadheaded B372 to C625 Separate and apart from service and worked train C625 back to B372	Shows crews were deadheaded separate and apart from service terminal to terminal connected with service during the test period.
10	08-31-02 MPBBT-29	RJ Stutes – 248 miles on train – 8 hours Separate and apart deadhead – page 27	Crew deadheaded B372 to C625 Separate and apart from service and worked train C625 back to B372	Shows crews were deadheaded separate and apart from service terminal to terminal connected with service during the test period.
11	07-08-02 MPBB2-08	AE Neimeyer – 248 miles – 8 hours Separate and apart deadhead – page 28	Crew deadheaded Separate and apart B372 to C625 and worked train from C625 to B372	Shows crews were deadheaded separate and apart from service terminal to terminal connected with service during the test period.
12	07-03-02 MPBBW-03 and QDYNL-02	KW Booker – 248 miles each way on each train – page 29	Crew worked train B372 to C625 and worked train back C625 to B372	Crew worked train Houston – Alexandria and then worked 2nd train back Alexnadria – Houstonx`
13	07-02-02 – MNOEWB-02	EM Perkins – 218 miles and 8 hours Separate and apart deadhead – page 31	Crew deadheaded Separate and apart from Houston B372 to LS609 Lafayette and worked train LS609 back to Houston B372	Shows crews were deadheaded separate and apart from service terminal to terminal connected with service during the test period..
14	12-15-02 – RDTBT-14	AN Deloach – 334 miles and 8 hours Separate and apart Deadhead – page 32	Crew worked train Houston B372 to Lafayette LS609 and deadheaded Separate and apart Lafayette to Houston	Shows crews were deadheaded separate and apart from service terminal to terminal connected with service during the test period.
15	07-06-02 QBLLI-05 and MNOEWB-06	LR Punch – 334 miles and 218 miles – page 33	Crew worked train LS609 to B372 and worked train B372 to LS609	No deadheads worked train both ways
16	11-30-02	DR Hardin – paid 8 hours Separate and apart Deadhead both legs of trip – page 34	Crew deadheaded Separate and apart from service both directions Houston B372 to Lafayette LS609	Crew deadheaded Separate and apart from service both directions from Houston to Lafayette. Cross deadhead diluting trip rate
17	12-26-02 – MNOEWB-26	GE Mitchell – paid 218 miles and 8 hours Separate and apart Deadhead – page 35	Crew deadheaded Separate and apart from Houston B372 to LS609 Lafayette and worked train LS609 back to Houston B372	Shows crews were deadheaded separate and apart from service terminal to terminal connected with service during the test period..
18	07-05-02 – MNOEWB-05	A Hazley – paid 218 miles and 8 hours Separate and apart deadhead – page 36	Crew deadheaded Separate and apart from Houston B372 to LS609 Lafayette and worked train LS609 back to Houston B372	Shows crews were deadheaded separate and apart from service terminal to terminal connected with service during the test period.
19	12-23-02 – IAPAT – 20	EM Perkins – paid 296 miles and 8 hours Separate and apart deadhead page 38	Crew worked B372 Houston to TB114 Livonia and deadhead Separate and apart from TB114 to B372	Shows crews were deadheaded separate and apart from service terminal to terminal connected with service during the test period..

The above examples, clearly show that crews were traditionally deadheaded by the carrier in the most economical way. We have three examples where crews were paid combined miles and 11 examples where they were deadheaded Separate and apart terminal to terminal and paid only 8 hours for that service. While there may have been a few combined deadheads paid, it is illogical to believe that Union Pacific is going to pay 296 combined miles when they could pay only 130 miles for the same service. There is no question that logic dictates these crews were deadheaded Separate and apart from service between terminals as proved in the 11 examples quoted above (Trips 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18 and 19). Two of the above referenced trips include cross deadheads to and from the away from home terminal in the same day. These cross deadheads do nothing but dilute the working trip rate. While Union Pacific has stopped paying the second trip rate for hours of service relief in all pools consisting of virtually thousands of trips, you have provided examples of only three instances in one pool where crews were paid combined miles for the return trip home after performing hours of service relief out of the away from home terminal. Three payments of combined miles does not outweigh the 11 trips where crews were worked into the away from home terminal and paid only 8 hours for a Separate and apart deadhead back to the home terminal. Three trips also do not provide conclusive evidence when weighed against the thousands of trips used to calculate trip rates in all of the pools. This communication is meant to address the data you provided at our meeting in San Antonio on August 27, 2006. There are other matters concerning this issue that will be outlined in future correspondence regarding this dispute. Please advise. Gil Gore

DOT DMS Docket No. FRA-2006-24840 - Remote Authority Technology

From: Gil Gore [mailto:thegores1@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 6:56 PM To: All Local Chairmen BLET UP Southern Region Subject: FW: DOT DMS Docket No. FRA-2006-24840

Brothers,

Attached is a waiver request submitted to FRA by Union Pacific seeking to facilitate automated granting and releasing of track authority for MOW employees via electronic communication with Union Pacific’s Computer Added Dispatching (CAD) system (Click HERE to view the document in PDF). If you have any comments or issues regarding this proposal, please provide the same to this office so that we may compile our issues and forward them to Brother Ponto for presentation. I would ask that you provide your input no later than August 15, 2006. Thanking you in advance for your assistance, I remain. Fraternally,

Gil Gore

---

From: Pontolillo, Tom [mailto:pontolillo@ble-t.org] Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 9:16 AM To: Donnigan, Tim; Gore, Gil; Hannah, Bill; MacArthur, Bruce; Rightnowar, Charles; Young, Michael A.; Briggs, Terry D.; Carter, T. Joseph; Dimond, Tony; Hysell, Mike; Jones, Terry R.; Keele, James; Kelley, Brian P.; Kurtz, Jeff; Meek, Randy D.; Palmer, Scott G.; Perkovich, Thomas J.; Renfro, I. Perry; Ricci, Mark K.; Smith, Timothy L.; Svob, Robert S.; Todd, Arlin; Todd, Terry L.; Way, C. Edward; Weston, Michael; Worthington, Jeff Cc: Tolman, John Subject: DOT DMS Docket No. FRA-2006-24840

Brothers,

On May 4, 2006, Union Pacific Railroad (“UP”) filed a petition for permanent waiver from compliance with certain FRA regulations pertaining to mandatory procedures to be followed by a Roadway Worker in Charge (“RWIC”) when he/she obtains foul time, track permit, track and time, or track warrant authority to occupy a main track or other controlled track, which petition was assigned the above-referenced DOT DMS docket number. The stated purpose for this waiver request is UP’s intention to implement what it calls “Remote Authority” technology, by which a RWIC can obtain the various authorities via the Internet without the participation of the Train Dispatcher. FRA published notice of the petition on July 27, 2006, opening a comment period that runs until August 25, 2006. I have attached for your information and input a copy of the docket. Comments opposing the petition are being drafted, and I would ask that any issues you wish to be considered for inclusion be provided to me — preferably electronically — no later than the close of business on August 18, 2006. Thanks for your consideration and input.

Fraternally, Thomas A. Pontolillo Director of Regulatory Affairs Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen 1370 Ontario Street, Standard Building Mezzanine Cleveland, Ohio 44113-1702 Cle direct dial: (216) 377-3503 DC direct dial: (202) 624-8748 Direct fax: (216) 694-0255 E-mail: pontolillo@ble-t.org

United Health Care - CEO Excesses

August 5, 2006 TO: ALL BLET / GTW LOCAL CHAIRMEN

Dear Sirs and Brothers:

Attached is research which I have recently completed regarding our health care provider, United Health Care (UHC). (Click Here to view in PDF)

The attached document is about exposing the unacceptable and obnoxious excesses in connection with our CEO at UHC (Mr. William McGuire) and other executive compensation excesses at UHC.

The attached document is to also make an argument / connection in regard to the so called rising health care costs at UHC and the funding of the UHC sky-rocketing executive compensation monies, which we ultimately are paying for.

I recently presented the attached document to our National President, Brother Don Hahs, while at the International Western Convention, in Rapid City, South Dakota.

From the podium, during the closed BLET session, President Hahs discussed some of the details of the attached report to the audience at the Western Convention. President Hahs then allowed me to elaborate, a bit more, to the audience, which I did.

President Hahs also stated from the podium that he will give the attached information, to our national negotiating team, so they can use it as ammunition on the national level in regard to battling the Carriers on the health care issue.

Why? It is because the Carriers on the national level have served their Section 6 Notice in connection with health care (which will include GTW Engineers).

The Carriers, via their Section 6 Notice, are requesting health care concessions, in the form of desiring to immediately increase our monthly health care premium to a whopping $ 378.42 per month out of our own pockets!

That’s right! You heard right---a whopping $378.42 per month out of our own pockets every month! And all this “concession talk” from a company (CN) that is awash in cash, and bragging about it!!!

The Carrier currently pays $ 1,146.44 per month, per Engineer, for Health Care. Now the Carriers (including GTW Management) only want to pay $ 768.02 per month, with us paying the other $ 378.42 per month! Guess who gets the “big bonus” out the so-called “savings” of such a concession? One clue—not us!!!

While at the Western Convention, there was a lot of interest, to say the least, in the attached report. Many eye-brows were raised, to say the least.

Please read and post. However, make sure you are sitting down when you read about these examples of compensation extravaganzas at UHC!

Fraternally,

J. M. Karakian General Chairman, BLET/GTW

CC: D. Hahs, NP

E. Rodzwicz, FVP

W. Walpert, GST

Paul Sorrow, NVP

J. Tolman, NVP/NLR

J. Murphy, Director/Teamsters Rail Conference.

D. Cameron, Public Relations/Teamsters

D. Hiatt, General Chairman / UTU – GTW

Any and All who may (and should) be interested.