BRCF

Brothers, 

 
    I just wanted to make sure that anyone who carries BRCF, read your email from them and/or USPS mailings. They are no longer deducting premiums directly from your check. You need to set up a withdrawal form. 
 
Here is a link with more information. 
 
 

Swapping Trains

With some of the recent actions by the Pine Bluff Corridor Managers, I wanted to clarify the issues of swapping trains on line of road.

When you are called and have not departed the terminal, there is no issue with being swapped.

The scenarios we are seeing are that the organization takes exception to are:

1.     1.  

After departing the terminal and the Dispatcher or Corridor Manager instruct you to pull up alongside another train and swap, regardless of the reason.

2.    2. 

Your train has reached the final terminal/destination and the crew was instructed to take charge of another train and yard/deliver that additional train (i.e., Labadie or Iron Mountain).

3.    3. 

The crew is instructed to tie their train down on line of road and get in a van, and deadhead either direction on the line to take another train on to the destination.

In each of these situations, a claim should be filed for an HOS – Work not in connection with your assignment (Claim Language Below). Additionally, if your trip falls into scenarios 2 or 3, you need to immediately gather the details and email them to your Local Chairman for additional handling. You still need to file a claim in all three instances.

For these claims to be valid, there needs to be rested crews on either the protecting extra board and/or the regular pool at either the home or away from home terminal. If there is a crew rested at either location, these are good claims.

When you encounter these situations, the documentation needed would be the BU of your train and the additional train you took charge of, a snapshot showing the rested crews, and an accurate FRA report filled by you.

 

Claim Language-

Claiming a basic day’s pay account being instructed by MANGER or DISPATCHERS NAME to swap/Tie my train down at LOCATION and take charge of TRAIN and deliver it to LOCATION.

 

Claiming a basic day’s pay account being instructed by MANGER or DISPATCHERS NAME to take charge of TRAIN at LOCATION after reaching the destination terminal of TRAIN. 

Hub Meeting follow up

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) -  A member of our Hub came to me with a letter he received from our insurance carrier that his adult child was dropped from the Vision and Dental portion of his insurance. He also explained to me that his adult child is no longer a full-time student. Upon research and contacting the National Division, we learned this is correct. Under the ACA, the Dental and Vision plans were not modified. Therefore, they are still under the "old" definition of Dependents. Which is coverage up to age 19 then from age 19 - 25, but only if they are full-time students and can prove as such.

 

P2P - For those who are not familiar, this is a new program the UP is rolling out. It has not made it to STL. However, if you look under the EQMS portion of your portal, you will see a create P2P event and a review portion. This program has many unknowns, and until we have the program rolled out and explained to us, we are not participating.

 

Dexter Crew Change - They will now allow crew change at the depot. Look for more instructions on this. As it appears for now, if the outbound crew is on duty and ready, you can pull down to the depot.

 

UTV at Dupo - I have spoken with Doug Garton on using the UTV, and his position is that they are only to be used by Yard Crews for Yard Service work. They are not to be used by road crews nor for transporting road crews. If this happens, let me know so I can follow up.

DENNY D’S DID YOU KNOW

Leakage Test On Distributed Power Trains

 

Did you know that when a leakage test is required on a distributed power train, the automated leakage test function is still required.

 

Prior to the new System Special Instructions being issued, a general order was issued removing the leakage test from Rule 33.7.3. With the new SSI, it is still gone from this rule. The leakage test was only removed from the set up process when linking up. 33.7.8 is the process for setting up the lead unit on DP train. Step 17 used to be the leakage test and was removed. Therefore the leakage test is no longer required during the linking process.

 

The chart in Rule 30.10.1 shows when a leakage test is required.

 

Remember, a leakage test is not required when performing a transfer train air brake test.

 

The obvious time a leakage test is required is when a Class 1 or Class 1A is required on your train or when a Class 1 is required on cars being added to your train. A leakage test is also required is when your cars have been given a Class 1 using a yard air test plant. One place this is done is at the Alton and Southern. While the cars connected to yard air, the carman has a valve that can be used to apply and release the brakes without the use of a locomotive. When you put your engine on, all you then have to do is an application and release and one of the required leakage test from 30.11.2.

 

Rule 30.11.2 list the three different types of required leakage test.

 

Part A is the Air Flow Method, which is preferred. This is if you have the proper gauge.

 

Part B is the old style 3 minute process when you lack an air flow meter or do not have the proper type.

 

Part C is the part I wanted to draw your attention to. It states that the DP system’s automated brake pipe leakage function must be performed on DP trains.

 

In summary, the automated brake pipe leakage function was removed from the set up process when linking up the DPU.  It is still required to be used when a leakage test is required when you have a DP train.

ESPP - Employee Stock Purchase Program

Brothers, 

 
   Attached is a memorandum agreement on the stock purchase program. 
 
I would have you note this is not a negotiated agreement, this is a package that was presented to the board of directors and passed to distribute to the employees if they choose to "buy-in" to the company. 
 
There was some language added to make it "legal" for agreement employees to have access to the program. 
 
If you choose to participate READ AND UNDERSTAND the attached document. Again this was not negotiated, this was a take it or leave it agreement. 
 
Fraternally, 
 
Brian 

Claims

Brothers, 

 
  At this time there are several claims we should be filling, the attached PDF has multiple documents combined to explain each issue in more detail. 
 
  • Deadheading by train
  • Board regulation claims for the Regular Pool and the Extra Boards 
  • Wait time claims 
  • Interchange and work not in connection with your assignment 
  • Claim on the Supt Bulletin on Engineers driving themselves 
 
The new claim in this is related to the Supt Bulletin, This claim should be filed every start you make. 
 
If you have any questions on the claims process or how to turn these in please let me know. 
 
Fraternally, 
 
Brian Young 
Vice General Chairman - St. Louis Hub 
File attachments: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon Current Claims.pdf865.26 KB

Targeting Claims Settlement

Brothers and Sisters, please see attached settlement for Targeting Claims and the HAHT associated therewith.

 

Ronnie Rhodes

 

File attachments: 

Board Regulation

Brothers, 

 
  We have been having issues with the regular pools and extra boards and how CMS calculates the miles. I have discussed this at meetings in the past and individually with some of you. 
 
 In short, the issues are: 
 
Regular Pools: 
  • When a crew flips or performs short turnaround service the "starts" does not always track with the system to reflect that.
  • When a turn in the pool is dropped the mileage is not reflective of that. 

Extra Board: 

  • When an Engineer Old heads a job the mileage of the job he is working does not go to the extra board, in essence, the mileage of the extra board reflected that the Engineer did not work at all. 
  • When an Engineer is used for a supplementing job (ie. XE06 ENG used for RE04 Service) the mileage worked by the engineer only goes to the XE04 as "zzz" miles and none to the board he came off. Again reflecting on his board that the Engineer did not work at all. 
  • There is also a similar issue with Yard and Extra jobs as well as some HOS Relife. 

These are just a few of the issues we have been working on to find a resolution with CMS and Labor Relations. It comes as no surprise that the carrier is not interested in fixing the system. We are forced once again to file time claims. 

 
I know that none of us like to hear the time claim response, yet let me remind all of you that in the past 3 years our General Committee has received over 12.2 Million dollars from Union Pacific over outstanding claims. 11 million of that was from a settlement over the vary same issue we are facing now, board regulations. They have paid out this amount and still choose not to resolve the issue. We have but to take to the claims again. 
 
I am including a word document so that you can copy and paste, print off use at your own will. To assist you in filing these claims. We are further taking more of the burden off you the Engineer and are not asking you to provide the documentation for the claims. We the Local are going to do that work for you. All you need to do is file the claim DAILY. You can sit down and file multiple at the end of the week or half if you choose. However ONE CLAIM FOR ONE DAY. Then simply turn the claim in the box at Dupo or Jeff City. If you are able and wish to file these claims and email the documentation you may do that as well. 
 
To be eligible for this claim you simply need not be laid off, for any reason. If you are working or in ok status, you can file a claim for that day. 
 
You can if you wish go back 60 days to file claims. I will have the claim language posted in St. Louis and Jeff City on the boards. 
 

 

Brian 

Claim Language

Extra Board Claim

Engineer (your name) claims 130-mile basic day account (Circ-7) (board) extra board was not manned sufficiently per Attachment “B” of Memorandum of Agreement dated March 28, 1989, as modified and amended by Modification of Guaranteed Road Extra Board Agreement dated June 6, 1996, and Letters of Understanding dated October 22, 1997, Guaranteed Extra Board Settlement dated May 3, 2019, and other applicable Agreements.  This claim is for the date of (date of claim).

Pool Regulation

Engineer (your name) claims 130 mile basic day account (Circ-7) (board) pool board was not regulated correctly per Standing Bid, Temporary Lodging, & Pool Freight Regulation Agreement dated June 19, 2015, specifically Agreement No 3. Article I (A)(1)(c).  This claim is for the date (date of claim)

HOS Violations

Brothers, 

 
   It has come to my attention in the past 24 hours there have been at least two cases of crews being told to violate the HOS and continue working past 12 hours. 
 
  If you are instructed to violate the HOS document it appropriately on your tie-up along with the company officer that instructed you to keep working. 
 
I would then like for you to send me a copy of the tie-up with an explanation of what work you performed past the 12 hour limit for our records. 
 
Fraternally, 
 
 Brian 

Pages