HP status

Brothers and Sisters, 


      Iam sure you are all aware of the increased HP Layoffs, we are losing 3 to 4 people a day in the St. Louis district. CMS does not get notified if you go into HP nor when you mark up. The medical dept will not tell us or CMS if the HP layoff is for 3 days or two weeks. We are going to try our best to monitor the boards and backfill where possible. 

If you have any questions call your Local Chairman. 



IBT Election Plan Summary

File attachments: 
PDF icon IBTElectionPlanSummary_0001.pdf780.31 KB

Jeff City hotel change

  As of today the 10th at 1400, we are no longer staying at the travel lodge in Jeff City. 
The new facility is the Capital Plaza, this is a temporary move until a permanent facility is found. 
Hallcon is going to be providing transportation to and from the Depot the number for the van will be posted in the yard office at jeff city. 
The van will take you to get something to eat, as there are no 24-hour facilities near the hotel. I would also note that not all of the rooms at the Captial Plaza are equipped with Microwaves and Refrigerators. 
The hotel does not have access to the HMS system, they do not know when we are called or arriving, it is important that you sign in and out. 
I will keep everyone updated on the status of a permanent facility. 

KCS Tex-Mex

WASHINGTON, D.C., August 28 — A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has vacated Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) approval of the Kansas City Southern Railway (KCSR) certification program under which locomotive engineers employed by a contractor of Kansas City Southern de México (“KCSM”) have been permitted to operate over Texas Mexican Railway (Tex-Mex) tracks in the United States since July 10, 2018. Under the decision, the matter has been remanded to FRA “either to ‘offer a fuller explanation of the agency’s reasoning at the time of the agency action,’ or to ‘deal with the problem afresh by taking new agency action.’”

This ruling followed a challenge by the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) and the Transportation Division of the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers (“SMART–TD”) to the Agency’s actions in approving the certification program.

The Court agreed with the unions’ position, holding that FRA “fail[ed] to provide a reasoned explanation for its approval of the materially altered engineer certification program administered by one of the railroads.” The Court further held that KCSM was under a statutory and regulatory obligation to have its own engineer certification program, which requirements FRA failed to enforce, finding that:

“By virtue of the Railroad Administration’s passive approval system and the complete absence of any accompanying explanation for the agency’s approval of [KCSR’s] modified engineer certification program, the administrative record is devoid of any explanation or reasoning for the administrative steps taken and legal determinations made by the agency in approving the engineer certification program. Likewise, in searching the administrative record for the rationale by which the agency allowed [KCSR] to certify the engineers of another railroad, despite the former’s apparent lack of control over [KCSM’s] crew members, we come up empty-handed. And in a hunt for the reason that service under a foreign regulatory system was credited to allow an abbreviated certification program, we hear only crickets.

* * *

“… what we confront in this case is a total explanatory void. There is no reason—not one word—in the administrative record for the Railroad Administration’s material and consequential decision making on important matters of railroad safety. Not even [KCSR’s] certification program itself, as submitted to the agency, provides an explanation for the relevant determinations that the Agency presumably reached.”

However, the Court declined to rule on several other objections made by the unions that related to conductor certification, transfer of the air brake testing waiver in place for northbound trains, and inadequacy of hours-of-service recordkeeping, finding that there had been no final agency action so the Court lacked jurisdiction to address these objections. In doing so, the Court acknowledged FRA’s “shadowy and unwritten processes make it difficult for aggrieved parties to navigate the … jurisdictional constraints.”

BLET National President Dennis R. Pierce and SMART–TD President Jeremy R. Ferguson applauded the decision. “We congratulate the Court for exposing just how much FRA has become captive to the railroad industry,” the Presidents said. “This is a significant victory for Tex-Mex crewmembers, but is just one skirmish in the war to preserve well-paying American jobs. We also thank all the counsel who worked so hard on this case, especially Special Counsel Kathy Krieger for an outstanding job.”

# # #

The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen represents nearly 58,000 professional locomotive engineers and trainmen throughout the United States. The BLET is the founding member of the Rail Conference, International Brotherhood of Teamsters.

The SMART Transportation Division is comprised of approximately 125,000 active and retired members of the former United Transportation Union, who work in a variety of crafts in the transportation industry.

Attendance Appeals


Our BLET Central Region Committee of Adjustments (GCA) has sought court action since the implementation of UP’s latest Attendance Policy effective 3/1/20 based on a point system per layoff.


We are also asking for your individual help while the court action is being progressed. We need you to go into your Attendance Monitor and print off your 90-day snapshot. Once printed, include your employee ID on the document, you need to get this information to me. The best way will be to drop off it off in our Division box at Dupo, email it to me as an attachment at [email protected].


Once the information is received, the GCA will appeal to UP Labor Relations each of the layoff occurrences that led to points being assessed. Also, in the future, if you have a layoff that leads to points, print that 90-day snapshot that shows the latest layoff and forward it to me so that can also be appealed in a timely fashion. I also need any documentation if you have previously gone into the Attendance Monitor and appealed assessed points and received a reply from UP.


I am attaching a document to show you how to pull this report. 



File attachments: 

Hours of Service & Turn-around Service

Hours of Service & Turn-around Service

Article 4 k. of the Mop Upper Lines Agreement states:

k. Engineers in pool or irregular freight service may be called to make short trips and turn-arounds with the understanding that one or more turn-around trips may be started out of the same terminal, and paid actual miles with a minimum of 100 miles for a day, provided:


(1) that the mileage of all the trips does not exceed 100 miles


(2) that the distance run from the terminal to the turning point does not exceed 25 miles


(3) that engineers shall not be required to begin work on a succeeding trip out of the initial terminal after having been on duty eight consecutive hours, except as a new day, subject to the first-in, first-out rule or practice.


This does not apply to a regular freight pool engineer, as the 2009 HOS LOU allows for the additional trip rate payment.

With this language, if you are instructed to violate any of the three points of this paragraph, you are entitled to a basic day for violation of A. 4(k).

Please take note and file the claims accordingly, the language to use should be:

Claiming a basic day, due to a violation of A. 4(k). I was instructed by (Company Officers Name) to (Include a brief description of the work performed).

Be sure to include your tie-up information along with any other supporting documents to your Local Chairman for processing.



Brian Young

Vacation Advancement


     I have been getting several questions lately as the carrier has begun denying in some cases the ability to advance your vacation up to 3 days. 
     I would like to note the carrier has always had this right to deny a portion of the advancement. See below: 
A. All vacation weeks will be scheduled to begin on Monday. An engineer may, if
desired, advance (prior to the scheduled date) or defer (after the scheduled date)
their vacation up to (3) days subject to the following:
1. An engineer desiring to advance or defer their vacation must notify CMS no
less than twenty-four (24) hours prior to the day the vacation is scheduled to
2. The first twenty-four (24) hours of the request to advance or defer the start
date of their vacation will be granted to the engineer without restriction. The
remaining time requested by the engineer to advance or defer the start date of
their vacation will be subject to manpower considerations and the service
needs of the Carrier.
   I know this is new to some of you, as this is the first time I have ever heard of the carrier enacting this right, however, it is the carriers right. 
I hope this helps clear things up. 

Mobilization Alert

File attachments: