Secretary/Treasurer
John Henke
John_suehenke@live.com
Supreme Court rejects carriers’ attempt
to reverse favorable FMLA ruling


CLEVELAND, January 15 — On January 14, the U.S. Supreme
Court announced that it will not consider overruling the favorable
decisions obtained by Rail Labor in the ongoing Family and Medical
Leave Act (FMLA) litigation.

By denying the carriers’ petition for a writ of certiorari, the Supreme
Court decided not to disturb the lower courts’ decisions that the
carriers may not rely on the FMLA statute to override BLET
agreements. BLET’s legal position has now been fully vindicated.

While the federal court part of this dispute should be over, more
work remains to be done.

Unless the carriers reconsider their position regarding settlement,
individual BLET General Committees of Adjustment will now have to
arbitrate the various claims that have been filed since the dispute
started.

“This is an important victory for BLET members and all of Rail
Labor,” said BLET National President Don Hahs. “We knew the
carriers were violating our collective bargaining rights by forcing
members to exhaust personal leave and vacation days prior to taking
unpaid leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. This victory
was a long time coming, but it shows what Rail Labor can achieve
when we work together.”

The January 14 announcement from the Supreme Court is the latest
victory for Rail Labor in a legal dispute that dates to at least three
years ago.

In 2005, a coalition of 11 unions challenged a decision made by the
major rail carriers to force their employees to exhaust their vacation
and personal leave days for FMLA purposes before taking the
unpaid leave they are entitled to under federal law. On January 3,
2006, U.S. District Judge Wayne R. Andersen sided with the unions,
ruling that the FMLA does not allow carriers to force employees to
substitute paid vacation and personal leave for unpaid leave when
existing collective bargaining agreements give the employees — not
the carriers — the right to decide when to use their paid leave. The
court held that “if a CBA gives employees the right to determine
when, or in what manner, they take accrued vacation and/or
personal leave, an employer cannot force employees covered by
that CBA to use such vacation and/or personal leave at a time of the
employer’s choosing.”

The carriers appealed the January 3 ruling in District Court, but a
three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in the Seventh Circuit
unanimously upheld the favorable ruling on March 2, 2007. In May
2007, the entire Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals refused a carrier
request for a rehearing, after which the carriers took their appeal to
the Supreme Court.

Eleven Rail Labor unions are involved in the case. Mike Wolly and
Margo Pave of Zwerdling, Paul, Kahn, & Wolly, P.C., are
representing the interests of six of the 11 unions — Brotherhood of
Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers, American Train Dispatchers Association,
Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen, National Conference of Firemen
and Oilers, and the Sheet Metal Workers International Association.

President Hahs thanked Wolly and Pave for their leadership in
helping Rail Labor achieve this important victory.


Tuesday, January 15, 2008
bentley@ble.org
Letter regarding 2010 Health and Welfare Contributions.

Deadheading and new Hours of Service regulations

CLEVELAND, September 25 — The BLET National Division continues to get reports from all
segments of the industry about problems with how deadhead trips are being treated for Hours of
Service (HOS) recordkeeping purposes and in the application of the law. Some of these
problems appear to be related to various carriers’ electronic timekeeping systems, while others
seem to flow from a misinterpretation of the law.

This is intended to be a single-source document article will answer all questions related to
deadheading and how it should be treated.

Before analyzing the law and current FRA interpretations, we want to define some terms:

• “Aggregate service” means one or more periods of time on duty within a single duty tour
separated by one or more interim release periods.

• “Commingled service” means any non-covered service that is not separated from covered
service by a statutory off-duty period; such commingled service is counted as time on duty.

• “Consecutive service” means a period of unbroken total time on duty during a duty tour.

• “Covered service” means the portion of someone’s time on duty during which (s)he is engaged
in, or connected with, the movement of a train.

• “Excess limbo time” means the limbo time past the 12th hour when the sum of on-duty time and
limbo time exceeds 12 hour in a duty tour.

• “Interim release period” means an off-duty period of at least 4 hours undisturbed, but less than
a statutory off-duty period, which occurs at a designated terminal and which temporarily
suspends the accumulation of time on duty, but does not start a new duty tour.

• “Limbo time” means time spent waiting for deadhead transportation or time spent in deadhead
transportation.

• “Start” means the initiation of an on-duty period.

• “Statutory off-duty period” means a period of 10 hours undisturbed time off duty, plus — where
applicable — the additional undisturbed time off duty mandated when the sum of on duty time
and limbo time in the preceding duty tour exceeded 12 hours.

The most important factor in accurately classifying and tracking time spent in deadheading is to
remember that pay status (i.e., separate service or combined service) is irrelevant. What
matters is how the time spent deadheading relates to the duty tour prior to the deadhead and to
the duty tour following the deadhead.

There are nine possible combinations of service and deadheading. Each of them — and the ser-
vice and reporting ramifications of each — are shown on the attached table. There are a fairly
complicated set of provisions that interact with one another, but the following general rules apply:

1. A deadhead is considered time on duty only when it is followed by covered service and no
statutory off-duty period is provided between the two (i.e., deadheading to a duty assignment).

2. Unless a statutory off-duty period is provided on both ends of a deadhead, it will commingle
with the covered service on the end(s) not having a statutory off-duty period.

3. If the deadhead is both preceded and followed by statutory off-duty periods, it is stand-alone
limbo time. If only an interim release period is provided, the deadhead aggregates with the
covered service. If neither a statutory off-duty nor an interim release period is provided, the
deadhead time is consecutive with the covered service.

4. The only time a deadhead, itself, constitutes a start is if it occurs on the 7th day (We have
asked FRA to change this interpretation so as to treat no stand-alone deadhead as a start, and
we will attempt to push a technical correction to the RSIA if FRA fails to do so.). A deadhead that
is followed by covered service performed without an intervening statutory off-duty period would
count as a start, but the covered service, itself, would not, because it either aggregates with or
is consecutive service with the deadhead. No other deadhead would count as a start.

5. All deadheading time counts towards the 276-hour calendar month cap.

6. Only excess limbo time counts towards the monthly limbo time cap.

The above explanations and table only apply in situations where the service performed before
or after the deadhead is covered service as a “train employee” (i.e., the member is engaged in
or connected with the movement of a train, including as a hostler (49 U.S.C. § 21101(5))). If
other mandatory service for the carrier or time covered by HOS provisions pertaining to
dispatching service (e.g., certain yardmasters) is involved, the application of the law is
significantly more complicated and the chart should not be used for this purpose.

The following chart is provided to help members understand the Hours of Service process:
http://www.ble-t.org/pr/pdf/HOSchart.pdf



Friday, September 25, 2009
bentley@ble.org
December 14 2009 Minutes