forced engineer program

[arail]

i just recently got forced into engine serivce with bnsf. Is there a way out of it, from all i have heard there is not. either quit or do it. I have no desire to become an engineer, just seeing if anyone has heard of this or heard of a way put would be greatly appreciated.

[Engineer Spike]

There was talk of having co-engineers at one point. This was makes sense on long ID runs.

When I worked there, there were some brakemen who were older, but not too far ahead of me, on the roster. These guys never took promotion to conductor. When the reduced crew agreements came, the had nowhere to go. They were forced to qualify. They had been brakemen on choice jobs, now junior conductors, at the bottom of the extra board.

It is foolish to let progress pass you by. This is why I was willing to go to another terminal, if I could get into engineer school sooner. It's all about getting your name on that roster first.

[Komachi]

Maybe this is a better topic for the "Employment Forum?"

[KV1guy]

I'm not sure how long you've been there, but it was my understanding that when you hired on the railroad that you accepted the condition of working the positions of the t&e crafts for the railroad. You hire on at Burger King, doesn't mean you flip whoppers and nothing else. I don't know where I read this but for some reason it just sticks out in my mind, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that when you signed on for the railroad as a brakemen/conductor, you also agreed to promote to engineer when the time came. That came from the carriers wanting everyone to be qualified to do everything. It was not something you'd have the choice with, unless you we're prior rights.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't think it's right deal as not everyone is cut out for it...and that's what you sound like. Not because your incapable, but because with your current mindset of not wanting to put the effort into it....quite frankly you'd have no business being behind the throttle.

[supernova1972]

Might call your local chairman but I'm pretty sure every agreement now has moving from the ground to the seat. We can pass it up twice and can be forced on the third time on CSX.

[COEN77]

Might call your local chairman but I'm pretty sure every agreement now has moving from the ground to the seat. We can pass it up twice and can be forced on the third time on CSX.

I know a couple conductors who bypassed going into engine service on CSX. Only way that can happen is if they have people younger in seniority waiting their turn. One of them has been on the railroad nearly 18 years. On CSX the crew consist agreement on forcing trainmen into engine service happened in 1994.

[LocoCam]

I know two "ok" conductors who were terminated due to failing engineer training on CSX.

[slchub]

I have to agree with KV1guy. Post-85 guys have been told and it is written that if the company so desires, conductors will be chosen from the ranks for mandatory promotion to locomotive engineer. The pre-85 guys allowed this to happen, and for good reason. I’ll let you explore that one as maybe it will give you a chance to read the contracts and rules that allow the Carrier to do this.

We were told this during the cattle call session with the UP when I interviewed. I’d get with your local chairman and see what avenues you can explore, but don’t be surprised when CMS calls you with a class date. I know on the UP that if you had junior guys under you that wanted to promote, CMS would call them ahead of you if they were chomping on the bit to do so. Not taking a promotion given the current climate and the way the Section 6’s go nowadays, you would be a fool to let any junior guys get a jump on you and you have to promote in your 26th year of service to be stuck on the board getting called 6 times a week instead of being on the pool.

Good luck.

[COEN77]

I have to agree with KV1guy. Post-85 guys have been told and it is written that if the company so desires, conductors will be chosen from the ranks for mandatory promotion to locomotive engineer. The pre-85 guys allowed this to happen, and for good reason. I’ll let you explore that one as maybe it will give you a chance to read the contracts and rules that allow the Carrier to do this.


Good luck.

I wouldn't go as far as to say the pre-85 guys allowed it to happen. Technology is what happened. The elimination of the caboose was the major culprit. We certianly didn't have a choice. With the caboose gone it eliminated 2 jobs right off the bat the first was the rear flagmen/brakemen the second the locomotive firemen because space was needed on the head end the UTU held the contract for the locomotive firemen. Those in engine service that didn't have previous trainmen seniority had one established with the date July 1, 1985. By 1994 UTU agreements were ratified to eliminate the last brakemen slot. It also included on some railroads manditory engine service better known as dual seniority. One has to look at it as added protection. If jobs are cut while working in engine service they can flow back and work on their trainmen seniority.

[KV1guy]

Heh, it was the screwutoo (UTU) that lied in that deal. Part of the deal if I recall correctly is that if the men signed the agreement to go to 3 man crews, they would never have to pay for their med insurance. I wonder what they are paying for then?

[COEN77]

Heh, it was the screwutoo (UTU) that lied in that deal. Part of the deal if I recall correctly is that if the men signed the agreement to go to 3 man crews, they would never have to pay for their med insurance. I wonder what they are paying for then?

I never met a conductor who would admit voting for the reduced crews. They were bought out in 1985 & 1994 for the vote. The guys that never took promotion to conductor that stayed brakemen for decades were forced to get promoted there was only a handful left they went to the bottom of the roster. Most were close to retirement age.

The issue of not paying for health coverage was part of the contracts in the '90s. The BLE gave up a portion of pay raises to keep our insurance at no out of pocket cost. A decade later the railroads jumped on the bandwagon with the rest of corporate America crying poverty on health cost. It was just the flavor of the times. They won. Railroad health coverage today is the only issue negotiated on a national level when most railroads have on-property contracts with it's union employees. I never understood how the railroads could cry proverty when under downsizing the workforce was greatly reduced. Trains went from 4-5 people onboard to 2 people, MOW was reduced by the new machines, computers nearly wiped out clerks ect.....This all started before the rest of corporate America caught on to downsizing.