Meeting #13

Issue Number 13

No Charge

Dec 1997 - Feb 1998

Inside
Signal Mix-Up	View from the Patrol Truck
Open Eye Survey Pt. II	Scattered Thoughts
This 'n That	General Chair
Local Chairs	Junk Yard Dog
	Legislative

On 06 June 1995, CN assignment No.9 struck a tractor-trailer on a public crossing equipped with standard reflectorized crossing signs near Saint-Leonard, Que. One crew member was fatally injured.

Yard assignment No.9 was shoving southward toward the Couture Boulevard public crossing with tank car leading when the train contacted an eastbound tractor-trailer. The conductor and trainman were riding on the platform at the leading end of the tank car. As the train approached the crossing, the trainman observed a tractor-trailer approaching. The trainman made some hand gestures as they approached the crossing, but was unable to recall the specific gesture. The conductor was communicating movement instructions to the locomotive engineer by portable radio.

Eyewitnesses to the occurrence maintained that neither the conductor nor the trainman detrained to stop traffic. The train was not stopped before entering the crossing or slowed sufficiently for any period of time to allow a person to detrain.

As the tractor- trailer approached the crossing, the driver and a passenger observed the trainman's gestures .The driver interpreted the gestures as permission to proceed across the crossing. The passenger interpreted the gestures as a signal stop the tractor-trailer. The tractor-trailer continued east, without stopping, over the crossing ahead of the advancing train. The rear of the trailer was struck by the tank car. The conductor was caught between the two impact surfaces and was fatally injured.

When cars not headed by an engine, snow plow or other equipment equipped with a whistle and headlight, are moving over a public crossing at grade not protected by a watchman or gates a crew member most provide manual protection of the crossing.

When providing manual protection of a crossing, a crew member must be on the ground ahead of the train or engine, in a position to stop vehicular and pedestrian traffic before the train or engine enters the crossing. A hand signal by day, and a red light or a lighted red fusee by night, will be used to give a signal to stop the movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic over such crossing. The train or engine must not enter the crossing until a signal to enter the crossing has been received from the crew member providing the manual protection.

CN special instructions further state: "A crew member must not give a Proceed signal to vehicles to pass over a crossing."

The CROR and CN's company instructions do not describe how a signal to stop vehicular or pedestrian traffic shall be given. There is, however, a rule pertaining to stopping a train or engine movement by hand signal. CROR Rule 12, HAND SIGNALS, recommends the use of the hand, a flag or a lantern and describes a stop signal for train or engine movements as: "Swung from side to side at right angle to the track."

Railway training regarding flagging vehicular traffic had specifically emphasized that employees were not to stand in front of vehicles or in any way endanger themselves in efforts to stop vehicular traffic.

In most circumstances where people are required to direct vehicular traffic, such as a police officer at an intersection, reflective clothing is worn and a glove or flashlight is used to enhance the visibility of the hands. These measures serve several purposes: to specifically identify the flagman to motorists as someone liable to be directing traffic, and to make that person more visible for the effective delivery of hand signals and for his/her personal safety. The conductor and trainman were not wearing anything that would have specifically identified them as flagmen. Flagging traffic is a common part of the duties of a trainman/conductor Even though the portion of their entire duties that involves flagging traffic is sometimes very small, wear-ing highly visible clothing could only enhance safety in other aspects of their duties as well.

Following this occurrence, CN issued a circular emphasizing the proper application of CROR Rule 103. In addition, the CN District responsible for railway operations in this area issued reflective vests to employees to wear when safeguarding a public crossing. Also, at this particular crossing, CN has installed stop signs for trains to stop before entering the crossing.

Transport Canada (TC) has forwarded a letter to the Railway Association of Canada (RAC) indicating that the provincial signaling instructions are to be followed when conveying information to vehicle drivers. In addition, TC has recommended to the RAC that a manual be developed to instruct employees in the proper methods of signaling vehicles.

REFLEXIONS is a safety digest providing feedback to the transportation community on safety lessons learned, based on the circumstances of occurrences and the results of Transportation Safety Board investigations. For a free of charge subscription,

The latest attempt at tracking employee opinion, the Open Line Survey Part II was completed this summer. Other than the initial mail-out, the company is being rather low-key about the latest survey, perhaps the results from locals 1923 and 1778 are an indication why.

This year only fifty-four individuals from the two locals responded--about 17%, in 1995 74% of our members responded. The low response rate could be because of the short period between the introduction of the survey and the deadline, or (judging from the results) maybe fifty-four members are pissed off and the rest don't care. About half the responding members had more than 20 years service, about two thirds were from the north.

Some important questions in the 1995 survey were left out of this one. Missing are questions like "Equipment failures are fixed properly" (57% of members disagreed in 1995), "I know that this company is doing its best to keep my job safe" (71% disagree, 1995), "I think upper management should go out in the field more often" (96% agree, 1995), "Communications at BC Rail are believable" (57% disagree, 1995), and "I think management is doing a good job of running the company" (78% disagree, 1995).

This year, we had some groundswell regarding communications. (1995 results shown in square brackets). A strong majority of UTU respondents (91%) said they don't trust what they hear from management [78%] and that reasons for changes are not well explained [76%], the same number are interested in the reasons behind important business decisions and long term goals [75%], most (97%) said they only get feedback when something goes wrong [90%],

Sixty percent feel that they are not well informed about the company [56%, 1995], seventy-three percent are unsatisfied with the communication with other departments [67%] and seventy-five percent disagree that management keeps them informed [70%]. Looks like the company has some work to do on communications and credibility.

Most of us like working here (80%), almost all (99%) think the work they do is important [97%], but a large number this year (93%) disagree with changes this organization makes [71%].

Most (83%) feel that buildings and structures are not adequately maintained [61%], that we (84%) want to know what our competitors are doing [42%] and (89%) want to know about BCR's performance [62%]. We (88%) said that no one tells me how I'm doing [85%], and that we want informal recognition (85%). Members think their immediate supervisor sometimes or never: expresses appreciation (85%), encourages creativity (83%) [58%], listens to suggestions (78%) [58%], encourages me to participate in workplace decisions (81%) [69%].

This year's survey focused on skills upgrading. Call me paranoid, but this looks a little fishy. Are they focusing on this area as a way to expand job descriptions? If the unions balk, will the railway tell us, "But that's what you told us you wanted!" Respondents indicated they are interested in taking business and industry training (73%), computer skills training (80%), skills upgrading training (78%) and training in how to deal with people (71%). Surprisingly, 55% said they would give up some of their own time to attend training programs.

The survey also focused on whether the company's policies and practices provides flexibility to meet work and family responsibilities (77% said they disagree), if your supervisor is flexible in accommodating the needs of employees with responsibilities outside work (61% disagree), and that the job leaves sufficient time for family life (62% disagree). Only 11% said they never experience a major conflict between the demands of work and family responsibilities, 39% answered several times a year, 37% some points most weeks, and 14% almost every day.

Ninety eight percent of UTU respondents said they have seen little or no action taken as a result of the 1995 survey. Sixty-one percent do not expect action taken on the results of this survey, but eighty-one percent believe these surveys should be conducted on a regular basis.

So what does this all mean to us? Not much really. It seems that the problems identified last time are still with us, and if eighty-five percent said they wanted informal recognition, then why the "Star Card" program?

In like a lion and out like a lamb. "The Man With No Name", who swaggered in here just a few months ago, has already been run out of town on a fast freight. He stuck around only long enough to change his name to "Mud".

Where did he come from, why was he here, where will he go? Some of the unanswered questions he's left in his wake.

The Mole, between raspy cackles, told me tales of the Man With No Name And No Job being high stepped out the front door at high noon, tears streaming down his cheeks.

There has to be a moral here somewhere, but what could it be? "Don’t get caught with your pants down", comes to mind, or "Please wipe equipment after use". If he was a real railroader he should have known that you, "Do not use washroom when standing in station".

Greetings Brothers and Sisters, yes we now have Sisters. Its about time. I would like to welcome our new members to the UTU. And to all our members I wish you and your families a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

We are facing some big challenges, the first being the decision from the labor board as to how many unions there will be in the joint council . Personally I feel this is borderline communism. What will be next? When a group of workers want to certify will the labor board tell them which union will represent them? Once the decision is handed down, if it is in favor of the company (which is owned by the same people who appoint the people at the labor board) we will be in a run off . I feel this would be a no win situation for either union, it will make our already low morale look like happy days. Our case before the labor standards was denied (another board appointed by the people who own the railway). In my opinion it all stinks of collusion.

All this just makes me want to go out and work a little harder for this company. I mean, try to take away our union, take away the conditions that everyone else in this province is entitled to and I’ll be happy to bust my ass--NOT.

I can’t believe these corporation’s have labor relations department, can’t CEO's just look in the yellow pages for a lawyer and dial the number himself?. They don’t negotiate, they don’t settle disputes, they just hide behind the long coat of the government (PSEC, Labor Standards, Labor Board). They don’t have to negotiate a contract, the government will do it for them. Do the math, corporations could save millions a year.

When is the government going to stop meddling? Will it take civil disobedience to wake up the people who we elected? They must allow all unions to bargain fairly without any involvement from the government. In my opinion it is a breakdown of the democracy were so proud to take for granted.

We recently had our GCA meetings in Prince George Nov 11 To Nov 16 and I feel we got a lot accomplished, I won’t go into great detail as to what transpired ,when the hammer drops we will be ready to commence collective bargaining .

Having said all that we still have to keep our chins up and we’ll get through the tough times .We have strength in unity.

It would appear that some of our brothers have a difficult time in understanding just what the Local Committees of Adjustment and the General Committee of Adjustment do. Those of you that attend Union meetings don't have as much difficulty in grasping the concept of trade unionism as those who convene in the various lunch rooms where it would seem that all the best ideas are put forward as to what the GCOA should do in negotiations. The hours spent in consultation with a company whose sole purpose is to make your job go away is sometimes enough to make a person wonder why we continue to fight. But, that is exactly what we were elected to do! Like it or not, we will fight for the rights of each and every member regardless of the issue. We will argue, explain and ultimately defend until we are blue in the face the rights of our members to the provisions contained in the Collective Agreement.

This responsibility is not taken lightly. The cost to our Bothers to get to where we are today has been high. Lives have been lost on the job and on the picket line. Lives are still being lost, families shaken to the very core. It can happen to anyone at any time. Certainly the more experienced you are at what you are doing should reduce the odds but it could happen to you. Some things we cannot control, but the things we can control we intend to control such as a company that doesn't think that track patrols are necessary, or that a train crew is entitled to rest en route, or that snow doesn't need to be plowed, or that the Collective Agreement is a valid document! Your General Committee of Adjustment believes that you are entitled to each and every clause in your C/A and will keep the pressure on the company to do the right thing.

To do these things we need your support. We need your participation at monthly meetings. We need to hear your concerns in the proper forum, where you and your peers can discuss issues and ask questions. You are not always going to like the answers but some very good ideas are being lost in the lunch room. Help us help you by letting us know what your ideas are whether by attending a meeting or putting your idea on paper.

Meeting Point is published four times yearly for the information and entertainment of the members of United Transportation Union Locals 1778 and 1923 (BC Rail).

The Editors of Meeting Point support the concept of free speech and welcome any submissions that may be of interest to our members. Submissions may be made to any Union Officer or to David Moorhouse at N. Vancouver yard office, Fax # 984-0452, E-mail

Submissions become the property of Meeting Point. We reserve the right to edit for brevity and clarity. The opinions contained herein are not necessarily those of the Editors or the United Transportation Union.

Recently, CUTE 1 rep. Mike Horne and myself took a two-day inspection trip of the Squamish Sub at the invitation of Peter Rebagliati, Manager, Track Maintenance and Construction and Doug Allen, Manager, Grade, Bridges and Track Planning.

Subsequently, I wrote a letter reviewing our trip and some of the conversation that took place, which I posted on local bulletin boards. Judging from the reaction, both verbally and in print, (see Letter to the Editor, View from the Patrol Truck in this issue), it seems that train crews perceive the Squamish Sub as dangerous terrain; and that I had been sold a line of bullshit. (Well, we did get BC Rail golf shirts).

It is ovious we all fear our safety will be jeopardized if train patrols are either cut-back or eliminated.

The Squamish Sub is truly a mountain railroad. Notwithstanding the efforts of MOW to alleviate geologic hazard, nature will relentlessly move mountains to the sea. Landslides will occur and rocks will fall. Train patrols are the final line of defense.

The UTU has long taken the position that reduced speed should be observed on unpatrolled trains in normally patrolled areas--or any area where crews believe their safety is in jeopardy. The fatal accident on CN in the Fraser Canyon earlier this year could have been prevented by a patrol immediately ahead of the train.

It is easy to understand why we are afraid; the railway has not communicated future plans for patrols, nor have they provided written policy for patrols to extend their coverage beyond normally patrolled areas if circumstances warrant.

If you have questions or concerns about track condition, rock work, bridges or patrols contact the people responsible: P. Rebagliati, (250) 561-4060, Cel. (250) 565-8904 or D. Allen (604) 984-5102

NOVEMBER 4, 1997 -- The Wisconsin Senate has passed legislation today that requires a "certified railroad locomotive engineer" and a "qualified railroad trainman" on every "railroad train or locomotive" operating in Wisconsin.

The legislation, "Assembly Substitute Amendment 1, to 1997 Assembly Bill 35," was passed by a 33-to-0 vote in the Senate, representing a victory for all United Transportation Union (UTU) members, and in particular, for UTU Wisconsin State Legislative Director Thomas P. Dwyer II.

Thanks to Dwyer's efforts, Wisconsin Governor Tommy G. Thompson is expected to sign the measure into law.

While attending last July's UTU Regional Meeting in Milwaukee, Wisc., Gov. Tommy G. Thompson indicated his support for the legislation and invited Dwyer and UTU International President Charles L. Little to attend the anticipated signing ceremony.

The measure specifically prohibits the operation of "any railroad train or locomotive in this state unless the railroad train or locomotive has a crew of at least 2 individuals." Violations would be punishable by fines of up to $1,000 per occurrence.

President Little praised Dwyer for his commitment and determination in securing passage of the measure.

When you first come to work for us here at BC Rail you will notice we do things a little differently. Instead of having two helpers in yard service, we replaced one with a green van. These vans are located in each terminal for all trainmen to use. When you first get in the van at the start of your tour of duty, you will note that it operates very differently than your own personal vehicle -- and needs little or no care:

- In the winter it can be driven diagonally across the yard between all the cars.

- It can be crushed between two railcars when inadvertently left on a crossing while making joints with no ill effects.

- The seatbelts rarely work and the doors often must be held shut when driving to and from hotels or bunkhouses.

- All four wheels need not be on the ground at any one time, especially when going for a good quit.

- It can be backed into rolling stock when attempting three point turns between yard tracks.

- They are waterproof. You can leave it in "drive" by accident and let it roll into the Fort St John duck ponds and it will still be as good as new.

- You can collect even MORE Airmiles by filling up at Shell using premium gas on the company credit card.

- If your terminal supervisor wrecks your van, the Company will gladly buy your terminal a shiny new Suburban instead." - Adrian Telizyn

Due to renovations, the meeting room at the Coach House will not be availble in 1998.

Top a the season matey, it's another fine issue of Meeting Point ye managed te get yer molly-grips on, I see.

Ye may have noticed that I missed the boat, so te speak, last issue. Davey runs a tight ship, an what with the tide schedules an' all, well lets just say that my contribution went te the bottom of Davey's locker.

This article was scrawled last Sunday, traditionally a day of rest an' a time to mend clothes an souls. Also a good day to retreat an' regroup.

Considering possible changes, an' contrary te what management, the government an' yer mother-in-law will have you believe, ye are a pillar of the community an' a backbone of the country.

However, being fiercely independent te the point of being difficult te regiment, yer underpaid an' overtaxed.

The above greeting now has an official place within the UTU at BC Rail. I would like to welcome our new Sisters as well as our new Brothers who have recently joined our ranks and wish them every success in their new employment.

With my 29th year of membership in the UTU approaching, I have been thinking about what the future may hold for the UTU on BC Rail. In order to do this I looked at the past, and having done that, thought it important to pass a little bit of the history of the UTU on to those Brothers and Sisters who may not know how and why the UTU came into existence.

The forerunners of the United Transportation Union were the early Brotherhoods established beginning in the 1860's. These Brotherhoods were created by workers driven to desperation by low pay, hardship and danger. In most cases the labour unions were organized to provide unobtainable insurance and death benefits for the families of railroad men injured or killed on the job. During this time hours of service were unlimited, employees worked seven days a week, no vacation was granted, pay was $1.00 a day upward, and there were no seniority rights. Working conditions were criminally dangerous with almost one third of the nation's Brakeman killed or maimed each year, and seventy percent of all train crews could expect to be crippled within five working years. Management arbitrarily dismissed any employees who dared show membership in any union. To say the Brothers who resisted management and formed these Brotherhoods showed extreme courage would be an understatement. These Brotherhoods continued, despite all the obstacles, to work on behalf of their members to negotiate collective agreements and provide safer working conditions.

On January 1, 1969, four of the original Brotherhoods (The Order of Railway Conductors and Brakemen, Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, and Switchmen's Union of North America) united to create the United Transportation Union to better serve the members. The UTU has continued since this time to work hard at securing higher wages and better working conditions for its members.

You may ask yourselves, what relevance this has to today's union working conditions. To this I say, it is simply a reminder of the sacrifices that were made to achieve the standards we experience today.

After reflecting on the past and considering what is taking place at present.........

- the attempt by BC Rail to eliminate the UTU as well as other trade unions on the property,

- attempts by management to eliminate hard-won working conditions with no compensation,

- a continuous battle with BC Rail and other outside parties such as the Provincial Government and Public Sector Employers' Council to ensure we maintain our standard for wages & benefits,

What is it that I see for the future of the UTU on BC Rail? I believe the UTU will succeed and continue to accomplish what is necessary to secure higher wages and safer working conditions. I believe this because of you the members. It has been through your support and the support of your elected officers that we have achieved what we have today, and it will be your continued support that will allow us to maintain these standards and achieve what the members request of this union in the future. Having been a UTU member for 28 years and holding one office or another for the past 20 years in this union, I am well aware of the importance of the members' interest and support. When it is necessary to let the Railway and any other outside party understand how serious we are regarding our right to a safer working environment and maintaining our standards for wages and benefits, it is you the members who allow me as a union officer to deliver that message. Without your support that message falls on deaf ears.

As a result of these reflections on the past, we realize what our Brothers and Sisters have sacrificed to get us to where we are today, and recognize that only with your continued support can we do what is necessary to maintain or improve the standards we enjoy today. I look forward to going into my 29th year of UTU membership and having the honour of continuing to serve you, the members, in my capacity as an officer of the United Transportation Union.

This will be our last newsletter of the year, and I think it appropriate to reflect on some of the events of the past year as well as what we will be facing in the future. From a legislative point of view, the most important issue that need to be dealt with is the health and safety of our membership, in order to deal with this, as well as the other legislative responsibilities, we have to deal in many different arenas. Oftentimes when we lose a battle we are discouraged, but we must continue to fight the war.

EXCLUSION FROM HOURS OF WORK AND OVERTIME PROVISIONS OF THE EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS ACT.

The employment standard’s tribunal recommended to cabinet that we continue to be excluded from the hours of work and overtime provisions of the Employment Standards Act. This was particularly disappointing, as we have worked long and hard to have this exclusion removed. Presently a coalition of other unions who are also excluded is being organized, and we will continue to fight to have the exclusion removed. It is obvious to me that the railway will not take any action to deal with the issue of scheduled hours of work and fatigued workers, as long as they are not required to.

The UTU feels the only reason that BC Rail has safety committees is because there is a statutory requirement to do so. BC Rail’s mind set is similar to that which we saw when the federally regulated railways were initially included in Part II of the Canada Labour Code. In other words BC Rail is 15 years behind the times. CN Rail (pacific region) in particular has come a long way toward embracing the concept of equality of the workplace parties in regards to the goal of reducing accidents and providing a safe and healthy workplace. The UTU adopted a position that we would not lend credibility to a Health and Safety program that did not in good faith fulfill the statutory requirements of the regulations. It was also our position that we would not simply remove ourselves from the process, but that we would continue to fight for the statutory right to participate.

The following criterion in our view was statutorily required and essential to our participation in a credible health and safety program.

BC Rail was limiting the participation of the worker’s representatives by refusing to pay them for lost wages. To add insults to injury, BC Rail paid lost wages to those it chose. In other words, BC Rail chose who would be the representatives. The UTU appealed this practice to the Engineering and Inspection Branch (E&IB). The E&IB supported the railway, and the E&IB’s decision was appealed to the Minister. The UTU was successful in this appeal, and received a decision from the minister to the effect that a member of the OS&H committee would not be placed in a worse financial position than they would have been had they not attended to their committee duties.

BC rail refuses to allow the participation of worker representatives in accident investigations. Their interpretation of the regulation (as I understand it) is that they will conduct the investigation and the OS&H committee may then review their findings. This interpretation was appealed to the E&IB, and as expected the E&IB again supported the railway. The UTU’s legal counsel has since prepared and submitted their case to the Minister on appeal. We were advised that the decision of the Minister would be forthcoming by the end of September, but as yet we have not received his decision.

The UTU has maintained that for those workers in road service, our workplace does not end at the yard limit board, and that our workplace encompasses the entire subdivision. BC Rail has chosen to argue that our workplace is the engine. The UTU’s position is that worker representatives should be included in regular inspections of the workplace, and that our workplace includes between terminals.

In a nutshell, BC Rail argues that one representative for yard and road is sufficient to represent those workers in a terminal. The UTU position is that, for example, a trainman working the road in Williams Lake, has no idea of the conditions faced by yard crews switching the surrounding mills, and therefore there should be a representative for each of these distinct workplaces.

Quite frankly, I think it is a disgrace how BC Rail has dealt with disability management. Without going into detail, there is a legal, and I believe a moral, duty to accommodate disabled workers. The Unions approached BC Rail, a committee was struck, a joint policy was developed, it was agreed that the administrator would have a medical background and would be jointly agreed upon. BC Rail then torpedoed the process by arbitrarily appointing an administrator who had a background at BC Rail as a WCB claims officer and a labour relations officer and for a variety of other reasons was not agreed to by the unions. The administrator that they chose is still in place, there is a bad taste in everybody’s mouth, the disability program is not working, and the most vulnerable are the victims. At this stage, for numerous reasons, I believe that an outside service provider such as MEDCAN is the only answer.

The Engineering and Inspection Branch (E&IB) of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) is currently replacing the regulations made pursuant to the Railway Act with a new railway safety code. This new code affects every aspect of our working life. The UTU is concerned that the consultative process is flawed in the extreme. There has not been a comprehensive table of concordance between the new railway safety code and the regulations presently enacted. The UTU has lobbied to have a tripartite committee of employers, workers and the regulator struck, to review the new code. We met recently with the Minister and this was one of the issues raised, we await his response. In the meantime, we continue to respond to the drafts that we receive.

BC Rail proposes to introduce LCS belt packs into the workplace. The Legislative department is concerned with respect to the safety, ergonomics, training and related stress.

I regret that I don’t have the space to raise so many of the other issues that concern us, but I though that the following statistics taken from the SUMMARY OF COMMON CARRIER RAILWAY ACCIDENTS AND OTHER REPORTABLE EVENTS report number 9 from the E&IB of the MMAH would be of interest.

Casualties per 200,000 hours (Cas/200,000/hours) in train operations (BC Rail): 1995 4.12 1996 7.16

The yard activity casualties are on average at least three times higher than any other activity on BC Rail.

Sisters and Brothers, I wish you and your loved ones a merry Christmas and a safe and happy new year.