UTU and National Carriers' Tentative agreement.

The United Transportation Union (UTU) and the National Carriers’ Conference Committee (NCCC) reached a tentative agreement Jan. 23 on wages, rules and working conditions retroactive to Jan. 1, 2005, and continuing in force through Dec. 31, 2009.

The tentative agreement, which must be ratified by some 46,000 affected UTU members, applies to conductors, brakemen, engineers, firemen, hostlers, switchmen and yardmasters employed by Burlington Northern Santa Fe, CSX, Kansas City Southern, Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific and smaller railroads party to the national agreement between the UTU and the NCCC.

Although the specifics of the tentative agreement will not be released until after discussion with affected (District 1) general chairpersons, Futhey said it provides for a 17 percent general wage increase over the life of the agreement, a retention of the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), and a cap on health-care contributions. The wage increases also include retroactive payments covering the period July 1, 2005, to the implementation of the tentative agreement.

Additionally, the tentative agreement provides a mechanism for resolution of the entry-rates dispute, an increase in the held-away-from-home-terminal (HAHT) meal allowance, and, for the first time, contributions by the carriers to the yardmasters’ supplemental retiree medical insurance program.

So, what do we get out of this agreement; hose job or something a little better?

..


http://www.utu.org/worksite/detail_new ... eID=40193

Lets hope it includes new guys going to 100%!
Its pretty bad when you can make more money on the extra board(making guarntee, working a few days a week) than you can working a local everyday.

Xponder wrote:the tentative agreement provides a mechanism for resolution of the entry-rates dispute

Doesnt sound like it... I'm betting they gave that away to keep the cola raises

Burner wrote:

Xponder wrote:the tentative agreement provides a mechanism for resolution of the entry-rates dispute

Doesnt sound like it... I'm betting they gave that away to keep the cola raises

I just wonder what the "mechanism for resolution" is supposed to be. To be sure, the carriers didn't outright grant 100% pay equity across the board for new folks.

..

All Local Chairpersons - CSX
National Agreement:
As you are now aware, the UTU National Negotiating Committee reached a tentative agreement today. The General Chairmen will be sent a copy of it tomorrow. The UTU Constitution requires that a majority of the UTU General Chairmen approve it before it can be sent out for ratification by each and every Member of the UTU. It can only be implemented by a majority vote of the Membership. Also, please note that in the UTU, craft autonomy reigns. Each craft -- engineers, conductors, trainmen and yardmen -- must approve it. If one craft votes it down, the Agreement is not implemented. This way one group cannot override the other group. In the other organization, it is a single vote.

System Agreement:
On Monday of this week, UTU International President Futhey, UTU Vice President Boling and I met with Michael Ward and Tony Ingram to discuss many issues, including our on-property negotiations. As you are aware, CSX had cooled our negotiations because of our position on an investment fund that had recommended the removal of Michael Ward. General Chairman Hogan and I recommended to President Futhey that we change our position on the investment fund from supporting it to a neutral stance.
On Wednesday evening, all the UTU General Chairmen had a conference call and we agreed to take a neutral stance on the issue. As a result, many positive things began to happen, including settlement of the National Agreement. In that vein, I believe that we will return shortly to our on-property negotiations.
If we ratify the National Agreement, it will be in place. If we are able to obtain and our UTU Membership approves an on-property agreement, such would take the place of the National Agreement. Our Executive Committee has directed us to continue in this endeavor as we believe that we can make great improvements in our wages, rules and working conditions.
As I advised you at our meeting last year, get ready for a great opportunity; we can change, for the positive, our wages, rules and working conditions. We will move our Agreements to the 22nd century.
Public Law Boards:
We have four PLB scheduled for next month and will be presenting approximately 100 cases. We conferenced our outstanding discipline claims today, and all the cases will be presented to Boards no later than May 1, 2008. There is no other union anywhere that is close to us on this issue. Other folks are years behind us.
Our philosophy is to handle the business.
As noted in our previous e-mail, the Florence Division will be returning some employees back to work beginning Monday. This effort is brought about through our arbitrations on manpower. We never gave up, we were persistent, and we held on. We didn't win it all, but they know that we are present and accountable.

MistahQ wrote:All Local Chairpersons - CSX
... Each craft -- engineers, conductors, trainmen and yardmen -- must approve it. If one craft votes it down, the Agreement is not implemented. This way one group cannot override the other group.

In the other organization, it is a single vote.

The other organization only makes "national" Locomotive Engineer agreements, so no need to address craft lines. A non-issue.

And the "guarantee" of craft autonomy -- voting a contract in/out based on craft lines -- sure worked out well for the _____________.

Seriously, sounds like the RLBC agreement except for retaining the COLA's and increasing the AFHT meal allowance. Time will tell regarding the COLA/no-COLA decision. If the meals are up around $11 each, GOOD JOB!

Do the "firemen" get a vote?
And why do engineers get a vote if "the other organization" holds the contract?

If new guys arent bumped to 100% Im voting NO and I suggest you other 80-90% guys do the same!

BigMike wrote:If new guys arent bumped to 100% Im voting NO and I suggest you other 80-90% guys do the same!

Yep. I want 100% or no go. (an increase in the AFHT meals would be nice, too..)

Their idea of addressing the New Hire rate of pay question is sending it to mediation all the new guys got was insurance after 30 days instead of four months. Go to utu.org and read the story about how they made this agreement it will make you think

BigMike wrote:If new guys arent bumped to 100% Im voting NO and I suggest you other 80-90% guys do the same!

I'm currently at 80% and I simply dont think we will get a bett contract by holding out...

We are getting 17%, increase in AFHT meals, and COLA between Jul 1 09 and whenever they sign the new contract...

I for one am going to vote yes and let the Mediation board have a crack at the pay rates. Remember you knew what the pay was before you started. And this is still THE best paying job I have EVER had.

Wow, 2 extra bucks... whoop-de-doo. Best paying job? Hah. Break it down to hours worked. Now add in AFHT time. Now add all the time you can't do crap since you are 1-3rd out. Yeah.. we are paid real well...

Sorry, more of the same old crap. If they want real progress - lets get ONE union.

Burner wrote:

BigMike wrote:If new guys arent bumped to 100% Im voting NO and I suggest you other 80-90% guys do the same!

I'm currently at 80% and I simply dont think we will get a bett contract by holding out...

We are getting 17%, increase in AFHT meals, and COLA between Jul 1 09 and whenever they sign the new contract...

I for one am going to vote yes and let the Mediation board have a crack at the pay rates. Remember you knew what the pay was before you started. And this is still THE best paying job I have EVER had.