SALINA HUB IMPLEMENTING AGREMENT: BLE
| Description: SALINA HUB In Finance Docket No. 32760, the U.S. Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board ("STB") approved the merger of the Union Pacific Corporation ("UPC"), Union Pacific Railroad Company/Missouri Pacific Railroad Company (collectively referred to as "UP") and Southern Pacific Rail Corporation, Southern Pacific Transportation Company ("SP"), St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company ("SSW ), SPCSL Corp., and The Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Company ("DRGW") (collectively referred to as "SP"). In approving this transaction, the STS imposed New York Dock labor protective conditions. Subsequent to the filing of UP's application, but prior to the STB's decision, the Parties engaged in certain discussions which focused upon the Carrier's request that the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers support the merger of UP and SP. These discussions resulted in the exchange of certain commitments between the Parties which were outlined in letters dated March 8, 9 and 22, 1996. Copies of these letters are attached collectively as Attachment "A" to this Agreement. In order to achieve the benefits of operational changes made possible by the transaction, to consolidate the seniority of all employees working in the territory covered by this Agreement into one common seniority district covered under a single, common collective bargaining agreement. IT IS AGREED: Covered Territory. This agreement does not cover operations south out of Salina to Wichita, Marysville to ll. Seniority and Work Consolidation. The following seniority consolidations will be made: A. 1. Engineers placed on this roster will be dovetailed based upon the employee's current 2. All employees placed on the roster may work all assignments protected by the roster in 3. New employees hired and placed on the new roster on or after the effective date of this B. C. III. Operational Consolidations 2. The double-headed pool, Salina-Kansas City, shall become a single-headed pool but 3. The pools shall be slotted and Attachment "C" lists the slotting order for separate pools B. Extra Boards. 2. The Salina extra board will not become a common roster extra board until an additional C. Other Operations. 2. MPUL employees shall have prior rights to their existing work on the Pueblo line as long 3. Since Salina-Kansas City pool freight service will be home terminated at Salina, the IV. PROTECTION A. B. This protection is wage only and hours will not be taken into account. C. Employees required to relocate under this agreement will be governed by the relocation 1. All Oakley Engineers that relocate regardless of seniority will be considered as required 2. Up to eight (8) 8th District Engineers will be treated as being required to relocate as a 3. Since all MPUL Engineers will eventually have to relocate, they will be treated as 4. All Engineers who receive either an in lieu of or New York Dock relocation allowance D. Engineers required to relocate under this agreement will be governed by the relocation 1. Non-homeowners may elect to receive an "in lieu of" allowance in the amount of 2. Homeowners may elect to receive an "in lieu of" allowance in the amount of $20,000 3. Homeowners in Item 2 above, who provide proof of a bona fide sale of their home at fair a) This option shall expire five (5) years from date of application for the allowance b) Proof of sale must be in the form of sale documents, deeds, and filings of these 4. With the exception of Item 3 above, no claim for an "in lieu of" relocation allowance will 5. Under no circumstances shall an Engineer be permitted to receive more than one (1) "in E. There will be no pyramiding of benefits. F. G. V. IMPLEMENTATION B. There shall be a phase in period as traffic moves off the Pueblo line and increases on the KP 1. Employees may make application to be the first reduced from a pool or extra board as 2. Employees reduced shall be qualified on the new territory prior to being placed on either C. Kansas City 8th District employees shall be entitled to 8 employees transferred to Salina, 6 1. Eight positions shall be advertised on implementation date for a period of five (5) days. 2. After the initial bid process is complete the Carrier may continue to run the pool as D. The Carrier shall give fifteen (15) days notice when the Salina-Sharon Springs pool is singleheaded. Oakley employees shall make application for these assignments and junior Oakley employees shall be forced if no applications received. The Carrier may continue to use Oakley as a crew change point during a transition period. The Carrier may relocate all OakleyEngineers to Salina not needed to man the extra board at Oakley. E. It is the Carrier's intent to relocate employees as soon as possible to Salina. The Carver F. G. 1. 2. a) If within the 25 mile zone, then that provision will apply. b) If outside the 25 mile zone, then the first out pool crew that operates on c) The Oakley extra board may be used on either side of Sharon Springs for d) None of the above prevents the use of crews used in combination NOTE: The above are not listed in order of use but reflect the Carrier's 3. Example: A Salina-Kansas City crew receives their east bound train ten miles west of H. After implementation, the application process will be used to fill all vacancies in the Hub as 1. Prior right vacancies must first be filled by an employee with prior rights to the vacancy 2. If no prior right applications are received then the junior prior right employee on the 3. If there are no prior right employees on the board described above covering the vacant 4. 9th district Engineers must protect non-through freight prior right assignments prior to I. This Agreement bridges the small Salina Hub between the larger Denver Hub and future VI. Familiarization B. The Carrier intends to qualify all Engineers on the runs to both Sharon Springs and Kansas C. Engineers on familiarization trips from the Hoisington and Council Groves rosters may be This agreement is entered into this 27th day of June, 1997. For the Organization: For the Carrier:
Attachment "A" Commitment Letters This refers to our discussions concerning the issues of New York Dock protection and the certification of adversely affected BLE employees. As you know, Union Pacific, in its SP Merger Application, stipulated to the imposition of the New York Dock conditions. The Labor Impact Study which Union Pacific filed with the Merger Application reported that 251 Engineers would transfer and that 772 Engineer jobs would be abolished because o f the of the Operating Plan. Within the New York Dock conditions, Section 11 addresses disputes and controversies regarding the interpretation, application or enforcement of the New Dock conditions (except for Sections 4 and 12). Under Section 11, perhaps the two most serious areas for potential disputes involve whether an employee was adversely affected by a transaction and what will be such employee's protected rate of pay. In an effort to eliminate as many of these disputes as possible, Union Pacific makes the following commitment regarding to issue of whether an employee was adversely affected by a transaction: Union Pacific will grant automatic certification as adversely affected by the merger to the 1023 Engineers projected to be adversely affected in the Labor Impact Study and to all other Engineers identified in any Merger Notice served after Board approval. Union Pacific will supply BLE with the names and TPA's of such employees as soon as possible upon implementation of approved merger. Union Pacific also commits that, in any Merger Notice served after Board approval, will only seek those charges in the collective bargaining agreements that are necessary to implement the approved transaction, meaning such changes that produce a public transportation benefit not based solely on savings achieved by agreement changes(s). Union Pacific commits to the foregoing on the basis of BLE's agreement, after merger approval, to voluntarily reach agreement for implementation of the Operating Plan accompanying the Merger Application. Even with these commitments, differences of opinion are bound to occur; in order to ensure that any such differences are dealt with promptly and fairly, Union Pacific makes this final commitment: If at any time the affected General Chairman or the assigned International Vice President of the BLE believes Union Pacific's application of the New York Dock conditions is inconsistent with our commitments, BLE and Union Pacific personnel will meet within five (5) days of notice from the General Chairman or the International Vice President to attempt to resolve the dispute. If the matter is not resolved, the parties will agree to expedited arbitration with a written agreement within ten (10) days after the initial meeting. The Agreement will contain, among other things, the full description for neutral selection, timing of hearing, and time for issuance of Award(s). In view of Union Pacific's position regarding the issues of New York Dock protection and the Sincerely,
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY This refers to my letter of March 8, 1996, outlining our respective commitments relative to BLE's support of the UP/SP merger. At an informal meeting regarding this matter there were several other related issues discussed, and this letter confirms the substance of those discussions. Union Pacific recognizes that implementing a merger of UP and SP will be a complex undertaking which will require planning and cooperation between the parties. Much of our discussions revolved around the process which would best facilitate the implementing agreement negotiation efforts. During our discussions, I agreed to meet with BLE in advance of the serving of New Yak Dock notices to try to come to consensus on various aspects of the implementing agreement process. Conceptually, it appears the parties are in agreement that our discussion of process should include the following topics: A discussion of what will be contained in the notices, whether they will be all-inclusive as to territory or relate to individual regions/corridors, timing of service of notices, etc. An effort to separate the focus of negotiations into logical regions/corridors and prioritize those negotiations so they match up in a meaningful way with implementing priorities, territorial boundaries of labor agreements, etc. General understandings and/or guidelines regarding size of the respective negotiating teams, where and how often they will meet, administrative support, and other such ground rules for the actual conduct of negotiations. We also discussed a concern expressed by several committees regarding the potential that Union Pacific might elect to lease the SPT, SSW, SPCSL and/or DRGW to the UP or MP for certain financial reasons. It was the concern of BLE that such an arrangement might create an avenue by which Union Pacific could avoid New York Dock protective obligations on some of the leased entities. Union Pacific has agreed to accept imposition of New York Dock protective conditions in this proceeding, and by definition that includes SPT, SSW, SPCSL and DRGW, as well as UP and MP. While we have no intention to consummate this merger through such a lease arrangement, Union Pacific commits to the application of New York Dock to such territories even if such a lease arrangement were to occur. The final issue which was discussed pertained to integration of seniority as a result of post-merger consolidations and implementing agreements. BLE asked if Union Pacific would defer to the interested BLE committees regarding the method of seniority integration where the committees were able to achieve a mutually agreeable method for doing so. In that regard, Union Pacific would give deference to an internally devised BLE seniority integration solution, so long as; 1. it would not be in violation of the law or present undue legal exposure; 2. it would not be administratively burdensome, impractical or costly; and 3. it would not create an impediment to implementing the operating plan. I trust that the foregoing accurately reflects our discussions. Sincerely,
This refers to my March 8 letter and to our March 8 meeting in Las Vegas, both of which dealt with the issues of New York Dock protection and the certification of adversely affected BLE employees and our respective commitments relative to BLE's support of the UP/SP merger. At the March 8 meeting, we reached an understanding that the certification provided for in the March 8 letter will begin at the time of implementation of the particular transaction in question. The following example illustrates this understanding: The UP/SP merger is approved on August 1. The implementing agreement with the BLE is reached on October 1 and is implemented on December 1. Certification will begin on December 1. I trust the foregoing accurately reflects our understanding. Sincerely,
This refers to my letter of March 9, 1996, dealing with when certification begins. The example in my letter deals with a situation where a single transaction is implemented and indicates that certification begins on the date of implementation. You have asked me to clarify when certification begins in the event the SP Merger results in multiple New York Dock transactions. In the event the SP Merger leads to multiple transactions with different implementation dates, certification will begin for two employees affected by a particular transaction on the date that transaction is implemented. In other words, multiple transactions with different implementation dates lead to different starting dates for certification. /s/ John J. Marchant
Attachment "B" – Terms & Conditions 1. Miles Paid - Each pool shall be paid the established miles between the points of the run for all service and combination deadhead/service with a minimum of a basic day. 2. Basic Day/Rate of Pay - The provisions of the November 7, 1991, Implementing Agreement (BLE) and the May 31, 1996, National/Local Agreement (BLE) will apply. 3. Transportation - Transportation will be provided in accordance with Section (2) (c) of Article IX of the May 19, 1986, National Arbitration Award (BLE). 4. Meal Allowances and Eating En Route - Meal allowances and eating en route will be governed by Sections 2(d) and 2(e) of Article IX of the May 19, 1986, National Arbitration Award (BLE) as amended by the November 7, 1991, Implementing Agreement. 5. Overtime - Employees who have an Engineer/train service seniority date prior to October 31, 1985, shall begin overtime at the expirations of eight (8) hours for those through freight runs that are two hundred miles or less and on runs in excess of two hundred miles overtime will begin when the time on duty exceeds the miles run divided by 25, or in any case, when on duty in excess of 10 hours. When overtime, initial terminal delay and final terminal delay accrue on the same trip, allowance will be the combined initial and final terminal delay time, or overtime, whichever is the greater. Employees hired after October 31, 1985, shall be paid overtime in accordance with the National Rules governing same and in the same manner previously paid on the UPED prior to the merger. 6. Held Away from Home Time - Engineers in pool freight service held at other than home terminal will be paid continuous time for all time so held after the expiration of sixteen hours from the time relieved from previous tour of duty, at the regular rate per hour paid them for the last service performed. 7. Runarounds - Engineers not called in their turn will be allowed one-half basic day and stand first out, if not called within eight hours, one basic day will be allowed and Engineer will stand first out. Engineers are not run around when they take the train for which called; however, it will be permissible to run an Engineer out on other that the train for which called, if practicable. Engineers cannot be runaround by Engineers going to a different destination (far terminal). NOTE: The provisions listed above are terms and conditions that currently apply to Engineers in
Side Letter No. 1 This refers to the employment options available to the 10th/11th District Engineers located at Oakley, Kansas as a result of the merger in the Denver Hub and Salina Hub. These options include 3 positions in the Denver Hub, any extra board positions at Oakley needed to protect local traffic and provide Hours of Service relief, with the remaining positions being relocated to Salina. The three positions at Denver will be posted at the time the thirty (30) day notice for the implementation of the Denver Hub is issued. A notice similar to the attached will be posted at Oakley to advertise these positions. The notice will provide that Engineers will have ten (10) days to submit applications for those positions and the senior applicants, if any, will be placed on the Denver Hub Roster with prior rights in Zone 1. If no Oakley Engineers bid on these positions, they will be required to bid on any positions advertised at Oakley or relocate to Salina. Yours truly,
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS - BLE SALINA HUB Article 1- SALINA HUB Q1. Does the new seniority district change terminal limits at the mile posts indicated? A1. No. It is the intent of this agreement to identify the new seniority territory and not to change the existing terminal limits except as specifically provided elsewhere in this agreement. Non pool freight service east of Junction City shall continue to be handled by Topeka employees. Q2. The Topeka-Junction City local runs west out of Topeka. Is it in the Salina Hub? A2. No, because the assignment goes on duty at Topeka it is not part of the Hub. Article II - SENIORITY AND WORK CONSOLIDATION Q3. If the trackage between Herington and Horace is reopened and UP Engineers operate over that territory, do MPUL Engineers have prior rights to that work? A3. Yes. Q4. What does it mean when it refers to protecting all prior right Engineer vacancies within the Salina Hub? A4. The granting of prior rights also creates the obligation to protect such assignments before filling the vacancy with employees without prior rights or with only common rights or before a prior right employee may place on a reserve board. Q5. Will existing pool freight terms and conditions apply on all pool freight runs? A5. No. The terms and conditions set forth in the controlling collective bargaining agreements and this document will govern. Q6. What is the status of pre October 31, 1985 trainmen/firemen seniority? A6. Trainmen/firemen seniority will be in negotiations/arbitration with the appropriate Organization. Employees will be treated as firemen should they not be able to hold as an Engineer. Those currently "treated as" will continue such status. Q7. Will the Carrier continue to discuss ebb and flow issues after the merger? A7. Yes, the Carrier recognizes the benefits of discussing this issue further. Q8. When the agreement is implemented, which vacation agreement will apply? A8. Vacation agreements used to schedule 1997 will be used for the remainder of 1997 thereafter the UPED agreement will govern. Article III - OPERATIONS; Article V – IMPLEMENTATION Q9. Why only a 5 day implementation notice? A9. To insure employees' protection starts when train traffic shifts.
A10. The UPED agreement calls for a blue printing. Q11. Will the Salina-Sharon Springs and Salina-Kansas City pool ratios be maintained? A11. No. With the movement of the terminal to Salina and the creation of single headed pools, there will be no ratios. Q12. Will constructive miles continue to be paid? A12. Where established, constructive miles will be paid to eligible employees. Q13. Because of the elimination of Oakley as a home terminal for pool service, what type of job assignment will the Engineers who remain at Oakley/Sharon Springs protect? A13. The Carrier anticipates that for those Engineers allowed to remain in this area that based on manpower needs, the guaranteed extra board will protect extra locals, branch line work, short turnaround service, HOSA relief work and so forth. They will protect extra work between Ellis and Sharon Springs; however, regular assignments including work trains between Ellis and Sharon Springs will be filled from Salina. Q14. The agreement provides that the Carrier has the right to perform work currently permitted by other agreements including using an Engineer from a following train to work a preceding train. Does this alter the provision from the basic Eastern District agreement that provides for a penalty payment for trading trains while operating in interdivisional service? A14. No, the provision and its application is not changed by this agreement. Q15. If a crew in the 25 mile zone is delayed in bringing the train into the original terminal so that it does not have time to go on to the far terminal, what will happen to the crew? A15. Except in cases of emergency, the crew will be deadheaded on to the far terminal. Q16. Is it the intent of this agreement to use crews beyond the 25 mile zone? A16. No. Q17. Will the 25 mile zone provision apply at Sharon Springs if there is no provision for a 25 mile zone in the Denver Hub? A17. No. Unless the parties reach agreement to include a 25 mile zone in the Denver Hub, the 25 mile zone will not apply at Sharon Springs. Q18. Is the 1/2 basic day for operating in the 25 mile zone frozen and/or is it a duplicate payment/special allowance? A18. No, it is subject to future wage adjustments and it is not duplicate pay/special allowance. Q19. How is a crew paid if they operate in the 25 mile zone? A19. If a pre-October 31, 1985 Engineer is transported to its train 10 miles west of Sharon Springs and he takes the train to Salina and the time spent is one hour west of Sharon Springs and 10 hours 24 minutes between Sharon Springs and Salina with no initial or final delay earned, the employee shall be paid as follows: A. One-half basic day for the service east of Sharon Springs because it is less than four hours B. The road miles between Sharon Springs and Salina. C. One hour overtime because the agreement provides for overtime after 9 hours 42 minutes on the road trip between Sharon Springs and Salina. (242 miles divided by 25 = 9'42") Q20. Would a post October 31, 1985 Engineer be paid the same? A20. No. The National Disputes Committee has determined that post October 31, 1985 Engineers come under the overtime rules established under the National Agreements/Awards/ Implementing Agreements that were effective after that date for both preexisting runs and subsequently established runs. As such, the post October 31, 1985 Engineer would not receive the one hour overtime in C above but receive the payments in A & B. Q21. How will initial terminal delay be determined when operating in the Zone? A21. Initial terminal delay for crews entitled to such payments will be governed by the applicable collective bargaining agreement and will not commence when the crew operates back through the on duty point. Operation back through the on duty point shall be considered as operating through an intermediate point. Q22. Can you give an example of other destinations that would not cause a runaround? A22. If one Engineer is called to run from Salina to Sharon Springs and another is called to run from Salina to Kansas City and they are in the same pool, then they cannot run around each other when called to work even if they do not leave on the trains for which called. Q23. When the UPED agreement becomes effective what happens to existing MPUL claims? A23. The existing claims shall continue to be handled in accordance with the MPUL Agreements and the Railway Labor Act. No new claims shall be filed under that agreement once the time limit for filing claims has expired. Q24. Is the identification of the UPED collective bargaining agreement in Article V, a result of collective bargaining or selection by the Carrier? A24. Since UP purchased the SP system the Carrier selected the collective bargaining agreement to cover this Hub. Q25. If no applications are received for a vacancy on a prior rights assignment, does the prior right Engineer called to fill the vacancy have the right to displace a junior prior right Engineer from another assignment? A25. Yes. That Engineer has the option of exercising his/her seniority to another position held by a junior prior right employee, within the time frame specified in the controlling collective bargaining agreement, or accepting the force to the vacancy. Q26. Are these guaranteed extra boards? A26. Yes. The pay provisions and guarantee offsets and reductions will be in accordance with the existing UPED guaranteed extra board agreement. Q27. Are there any restrictions on routing of traffic or combining assignments on implementation day or thereafter? A27. There are no restrictions on the routing of traffic in the Salina Hub once the agreement becomes effective upon implementation. There will be a single collective bargaining agreement and limitations that currently exist in that agreement will govern, e.g., radius provisions for road switchers, road/yard moves etc. However, none of these restrictions cover through freight routing. The combining of assignments is covered in this agreement. Q28. On implementation will all Engineers be contacted concerning job placement? A28. No, the implementation process will be phased in and employees will remain on their assignments unless abolished or combined and then they may place on another assignment. The new seniority rosters will be available for use by employees who have a displacement. Q29. Will the Carrier offer separation allowances? A29. The Carrier will review its manpower needs at each location and may offer separation allowances if the Carrier determines that they will assist in the merger implementations. Q30. When will reserve boards be established and under what conditions will they be governed? A30. After qualification has been completed in the Salina Hub and prior to reducing Engineers from assignments who are on the initial merged roster. When reserve boards are established, they will be governed by the current agreement covering the UPED Engineers at Salina. Q32. What options will apply for the 10/11th district Engineers? A32. Three Engineers will be offered the option to be assigned to the Denver Hub, those not going to the Denver Hub will be covered under this agreement. ARTICLE IV - PROTECTION Q33. Will any UPED 8th District employees receive NYD protection as a result of this agreement? A33. Yes, but only those 8th District employees from Kansas City whose applications are accepted at the time of implementation for assignments at Salina except as provided in Q & A 60. Q34. What is automatic certification? A34. An understanding reached by the parties that an employee will be provided the benefits of the applicable labor protective conditions without having to prove he was adversely affected as a result of implementation of this Agreement. Q35. How will the test period average be determined? A35. The parties have agreed to use the calendar year 1996 as the twelve month period. Normally, the twelve month period immediately prior to the implementation date is used, however, since severe flooding on the SP and UP beginning January 1, 1997, altered normal service through the central corridor, the parties agreed to use the 1996 calendar year. Q36. How does the Carrier calculate test period earnings if, for example, an employee missed two (2) months compensated service in 1996? A36. If an employee had no compensated service in the two (2) months, the Carrier will go back fourteen (14) months to November 1, 1995, to calculate the test period earnings based on twelve (12) months compensated service. Q37. How will an employee be advised of their test period earnings? A37. Test period averages will be furnished to each individual and the General Chairman. Q38. How will union officers' test period average be calculated? A38. In accordance with past practice pursuant to other merger transactions on the UP system. Q39. How is length of service calculated? A39. It is the length of continuous service an employee has in the service of the Carrier with a month of credit for each month of compensated service. Q40. If an employee has three years of Engineers service and three years of conductor service, how many years of protection will they have? A40. Six. Q41. How will the employees know which jobs are higher rated? A41. The Carrier will periodically post job groupings identifying the highest to lowest paid jobs. Q42. Will specific jobs be identified in each grouping? A42. Pools, locals and extra boards may be identified separately but yard jobs and road switchers will not be. Q43. What rights does an employee have if he/she is already covered under labor protection provisions resulting from another transaction? A43. Section 3 of New York Dock permits employees to elect which labor protection they wish to be protected under. By agreement between the parties, if an employee has three years remaining due to the previous implementation of Interdivisional Service the employee may elect to remain under that protection for three years and then switch to the number of years remaining under New York Dock. If an employee elects New York Dock then he/she cannot later go back to the original protection even if additional years remain. It is important to remember that an employee may not receive duplicate benefits, extend their protection period or count protection payments under another protection provision toward their test period average for this transaction. Q44. If an employee is displaced from his/her assignment and not immediately notified of the displacement, will their New York Dock protection be reduced? A44. An employee's reduction from New York Dock protection would commence with notification or attempted notification by the Carrier and would continue until the employee placed themselves. Q45. How will reductions from protection be calculated? A45. In an effort to minimize uncertainty concerning the amount of reductions and simplify this process, the parties have agreed to handle reductions from New York Dock protection as follows: 1. Pool freight assignments – 1/15 of the monthly test period average will be reduced for each 2. Five day assignments - 1/22 of the monthly test period average will be reduced for each unpaid absence of up to 24 hours or part thereof. Absences beyond 24 hours will result in another 1/22 reduction for each additional 24 hour period or part thereof. 3. Six-seven day assignments - The same process as above except 1/26 for a six day assignment 4. Extra board assignments – 1/20 of the monthly test period average will be reduced for each NOTE: Engineers on extra boards that go to the foot of the extra boards after a layoff will be Q46. Why are there different dollar amounts for non-home owners and homeowners? A46. New York Dock has two provisions covering relocating. One is Article I Section 9 Moving Expenses and the other is Section 12 Losses from Home Removal. The $10,000 is in lieu of New York Dock moving expenses and the remaining $20,000 is in lieu of loss on sale of home. Q47. Why is there one price on loss of on sale of home? A47. It is an in lieu of amount. Employees have an option of electing the in lieu of amount or claiming New York Dock benefits. Some people may not experience a loss on sale of home or may not want to go through the procedures to claim the loss under New York Dock. Q48. What is loss on sale of home for less than fair value? A48. This refers to the loss on the value of the home those results from the carrier implementing this merger transaction. In many locations the impact of the merger may not affect the value of a home and in some locations the merger may affect the value of a home. Q49. If the parties cannot agree on the loss of fair value what happens? A49. New York Dock Article I Section 12 (d) provides for a panel of real estate appraisers to determine the value before the merger announcement and the value after the merger transaction. Q50. What happens if an employee sells the home for $20,000 to a family member? A50. That is not a bona fide sale and the employee would not be entitled to either an in lieu of payment or a New York Dock payment for the difference below the fair value. Q51. What is the most difficult part of New York Dock in the sale transaction? A51. Determine the value of the home before the merger transaction. While this can be done through the use of professional appraisers, many people think their home is valued at a different amount. Q52. Who is required to relocate and is thus eligible for the allowance? A52. An employee who can no longer hold a position at his/her location and must relocate to hold a position as a result of the merger. This excludes employees who are borrow outs or forced to a location and released. In addition, this agreement has provisions that treat certain employees as required to relocate. Q53. Are there mileage components that govern the eligibility for an allowance? A53. Yes, the employee must have a reporting point farther than his/her old reporting point and at least 30 miles between the current home and the new reporting point and at least 30 miles between reporting points. Q54. Can you give some examples? A54. The following examples would be applicable. Example 1: Employee A lives 25 miles south of Salina and works a position at Hoisington which is 50 miles away. As a result of the merger he/she is assigned to a position at Salina. Because his/her new reporting point is closer to the place of residence, no allowance is given. Example 2: Employee B lives 20 miles south of Council Grove and works a position at Council Grove. As a result of the merger he/she goes on duty at Salina which is 60 miles away. The employee meets the requirement for an allowance and whether he/she is a home owner who sells their home or a nonhomeowner determines the amount of the allowance. Q55. The Agreement provides that certain employees will be "treated as" having to relocate as a result of the merger. Does that mean such employees do not have to meet the requirement of the mileage test in order to qualify for a relocation allowance? A55. No the mileage requirements apply to all employees. Q56. Must MPUL Engineers and Oakley Engineers be forced to an assignment to be eligible for relocation benefits? A56. No, since they must relocate they can make application for other assignments. Q57. Will Engineers be allowed temporary lodging when relocating? A57. Engineers entitled to a relocation allowance shall be given temporary lodging for thirty (30) consecutive days unless they claim the thirty (30) day driving allowance to Salina. Q58. Is the Reserve Board treated as the highest rated position? A58. No. Q59. After all employees are qualified and all positions filled and there is a surplus in the Hub, how are Reserve Board positions allocated? A59. [Organization to advise] Q60. Will UPED Kansas City 8th District employees currently holding positions in the Kansas City-Salina pool be entitled to NYD protection if they do not bid on the positions being transferred to Salina under this implementing agreement? A60. The employees in the Kansas City-Salina pool may elect to begin NYD protection upon implementation of the Salina Hub; however, they shall not be entitled to begin a new protection period after the merger agreement/award covering Kansas City is effective. Q61. Will employees listed on the merged roster who are on the bump board, or not working on the implementation date due to a leave of absence or medical leave be eligible for NYD protection as specified in Article VI? A61. Yes. When such employees return to active service they will be eligible for NYD protection.
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY As a result of merger negotiations of the Salina Hub, proposals have been sent to your offices for review and potential ratification by your membership. Concurrently the dynamics of business in the Central Corridor, BNSF start up of traffic rights and Salt Lake and Denver Hub merger implementation create the potential for train operations to have an impact on employees identified in the Salina Hub. In order to avoid potential conflicts with regards to the various provisions of the Salina Hub proposal and to avoid lost work opportunities pending either ratification or arbitration it is proposed that the Salina proposal be used as an interim agreement effective June 1. 1997. The parties would agree: 1. The agreement would be used until either the proposal is passed or if not passed until an 2. Employees would not be permitted to relocate during the interim period but operations would be as follows: a) Salina-Kansas City would stay a double headed pool with all new turns added at Salina b) Salina-Sharon Springs would stay a double headed pool with all new turns added at c) MPUL employees shall receive the driving allowance for working at Salina and the 3. Employees would receive wage protection during the interim period and the time will not count against their New York Dock time. 4. The BLE shall advise the Carrier no later than June 23, 1997 if the proposal is ratified. Upon Yours truly,
To: Jerry O. Everett, Karolyn A. Burchfield, Lynn A. Lambert, Notice has been served on the BLE and the UTU to implement the
To:Thomas L. Dein, William B. Hutfles, Susan L. Wimmer Assuming a July 1 implementation date, just a reminder that rosters and TPAs |
