MERGER IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENT (Salina Hub)
between the
UNION PACIFIC/MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY
and the
UNITED TRANSPORTATION UNION
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 STB 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 United Transportation Union 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 February 26,1996 and March 26,1996. 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:
I. Covered Territory.
As the result of merger and the abandonment of a portion of the Hoisington Subdivision, UP and MPUL operations between Hoisington and Horace, Council Grove and Hoisington, Salina to Sharon Springs, Salina to Hoisington, Salina to Kansas City and all stations, branch lines, industrial leads and main line between the points identified excluding the tracks from west of Junction City to Kansas City for non-through freight service, shall be consolidated into a unified operation. The parties recognize that some of the tracks that go into Kansas City are shared by other seniority districts and that tracks may continue to be shared.This agreement does not cover operations south out of Salina to Wichita, Marysville to Herington, or the Topeka yard. However, the parties recognize that a later notice may amend this agreement to cover operations between and or including these points.
II. Seniority and Work Consolidation.
To achieve the work efficiencies and allocation of forces that are necessary to make the merged Carrier operate efficiently as a unified system, an adequate supply of forces shall be relocated from locations where assignments are abolished to locations where new assignments are established.
The following seniority consolidations will be made:
III. Operational Consolidations
IV. PROTECTION
V. IMPLEMENTATION
NOTE: The above are not listed in order of use but reflect the Carrier’s alternatives for covering Hours of Service Relief.
Example: A Salina-Kansas City crew receives their eastbound train ten miles west of the Salina terminal but within the 25 mile terminal zone limits and runs to Kansas City. They shall be paid the actual miles established for the Salina-Kansas City run and an additional one-half basic day for handling the train from the point ten (10) miles west of the Salina terminal.
VI. Familiarization
VII. Crew Consist
This agreement is entered into this 27th day of June, 1997.
February 26,1996
Mr. Charles Little
President UTU
14600 Detroit Ave
Cleveland OH 44107
Dear Sir
This refers to our earlier conversation concerning the issues of New York Dock protection and the certification of adversely affected UTU 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 UP filed with the Merger Application reported that 328 trainmen would transfer, that 1081 trainmen jobs (net) wou|d be abolished, that 85 UTU represented yardmaster jobs and 17 hostler positions would be affected because of the implementation of the Operating Plan. The Labor impact Study also indicates that a number of engineer positions will be affected but does not indicate how many, if any, of those are working on properties where engineers are represented by the UTU.
Within the New York Pock conditions, Section 11 addresses disputes and controversies regarding the interpretation, application or enforcement of the New York Dock conditions (except for Sections 4 and 12). Under Section 1 1 , 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 the issue of whether an employee was adversely affected by a transaction: UP will grant automatic certification as adversely affected by the merger to the 1409 train service employees, the 85 UTU-represented yardmasters and the 17 UTU represented hostlers projected to be adversely affected in the Labor Impact Study and to all other train service employees and UTU represented yardmasters and hostlers identified in any Merger Notice served after Board approval. UP will also grant automatic certification to any engineers adversely affected by the merger who are working on properties where engineers are represented by the UTU. UP will supply UTU with the names and TPA’s of such employees as soon as possible upon implementation of approved merger.
utusalina062797Union Pacific commits to the foregoing on the oasis or u i u s agreemeni, merger approval, to voluntarily reach agreement for implementation of the Operating Plan accompanying the Merger Application. UP also commits that, in any Merger Notice served after Board approval, it will only seek those changes in existing 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 change(s).
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 International President of the UTU (or his designated representative) believes Union Pacific’s application of the New York Dock conditions is inconsistent with our commitments, UTU and UP personnel will meet within five (5) days of notice from the UTU international President or his designated representative and agree to expedited arbitration with a written agreement within ten (10) days after the initial meeting if the matter is not resolved, which.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 certification of employees, I understand that the UTU will now support the UP/SP merger.
Sincerely,
J J. Marchant
February 26, 1996
Mr. Charles Little
President UTU
14600 Detroit Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44107
Dear Mr. Little:
This refers to our earlier discussions concerning UTU’s support of the UP/SP Merger.
During^those discussions, you inquired whether as a part of the UP/SP Merger, some or all of the DRGW, SSW, SPCSL or SPT might be leased to the MP or UP. If so, you asked what UP’s position would be with regard to the applicability of the New York Dock protective conditions to such a lease.
Currently, we do not intend to use a lease arrangement to complete the merger of the various SP properties into MP or UP. However, if our plans were to change and one or more of the SP properties was leased to MP or UP, the New York Dock conditions .would, nevertheless, be applicable. This would be consistent with the fact that UP has agreed to accept imposition of the New York Dock protective conditions in this proceeding.
I trust this accurately reflects our discussions.
Sincerely,
J. J. Marchant
March 26, 1996
Byron Boyd
Asst President UTU
14600 Detroit Avenue
Cleveland. OH 44107
Dear Sir
This refers to our earlier conversations concerning the most appropriate method of calculating a test period average for a union officer who-is leaving his or her union office .and returning to full time employment with the Carrier and had no Union Pacific earnings (in the case of a full time union officer) or reduced earnings (in the case of a part-time union officer) during the test period.
After discussing the matter with Mike Hartman, Director of Employee Relations, I advised that we usually calculate a TPA in such cases by using the earnings of the two-individuals immediately above and immediately below the union officer on the seniority roster to produce an “average earnings/ This average then becomes the union officer’s TPA. Mike also assured me that, in calculating such an average, we ‘de-select* any employee with unusually low earnings (i.e., medical problems, excessive layoffs, etc.).
I assume that you are in agreement with the method of calculation described above. However, if you have any concerns, please do riot hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
J. J. Marchant
| Pool Allocation Attachment “C” |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| West Salina-Sharon Springs(6/21) | East Salina-Kansas City (8/20) | Pool Turn | District | Pool Turn | District |
| 1 | 10th | 1 | 9th |
| 2 | 12th | 2 | 9th |
| 3 | 10th | 3 | 10th |
| 4 | 12th | 4 | 9th |
| 5 | 10th | 5 | 9th |
| 6 | 10th | 6 | 10th |
| 7 | 12th | 7 | 9th |
| 8-23 | MPUL | 8 | 9th |
| 24-27 | UPED | 9 | 10th |
| 28-end | Common Roster | 10-25 | MPUL |
| 26-29 | UPED | ||
| 30-end | Common Roster | ||
| Combined Pools: Sharon Springs – Salina – Kansas City | |
|---|---|
| Pool Turn | District |
| (TO BE FURNISHED BY ORGANIZATION) | |
Q1. Does the new seniority district change terminal or switching 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 employees operate over that territory, do MPUL employees have prior rights to that work?
A3. Yes.
Q4. What does it mean when it refers to protecting all prior right empbyee 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. When the agreement is implemented, which vacation agreement will apply?
A6. 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
Q7. Why only a 5 day implementation notice?
A7. To insure employees’ protection starts when train traffic shifts.
Q8. Will the pools be blue printed or run first in first out?
A8. The UPED agreement calls for a blue printing
Q9. Will the Salina-Sharon Springs and Salina-Kansas City pool ratios be maintained?
A9. No. With the movement of the terminal to Salina and the creation of single headed pools, there will be no ratios.
Q10. Will constructive miles continue to be paid?
A10. Where established, constructive miles will be paid to eligible employees.
Q11. Because of the elimination of Oakley as a home terminal for pool service, what type of job assignment will the employees who remain at Oakley protect?
A11. The Carrier anticipates that for those employees 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.
Q12. The agreement provides that the Carrier has the right to perform work currently permitted by other agreements including using an employee 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?
A12. No, the provision and its application is not changed by this agreement.
Q13. 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?
A13. Except in cases of emergency, the crew will be deadheaded on to the far terminal.
Q14. Is it the intent of this agreement to use crews beyond the 25 mile zone?
A14. No.
Q15. Will the 25 mile zone provision apply at Sharon Springs if there is no provision for a 25 mile zone in the Denver Hub?
A15. 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.
Q16. Is the Vz basic day for operating in the 25 mile zone frozen and/or is it a duplicate payment/special allowance?
A16. No, it is subject to future wage adjustments and it is not duplicate pay/special allowance.
Q17. How is a crew paid if they operate in the 25 mile zone?
A17. If a pre-October 31,1985 employee 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 west of Sharon Springs because it is less than four hours spent in that service.
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”)
Q18. Would a post October 31,1985 employee be paid the same?
A18. No. The National Disputes Committee has determined that post October 31, 1985 employees come under the overtime rules established under the National Agreements/Awards/Implementing Agreements that were effective after that date for both pre-existing runs and subsequently established runs. As such, the post October 31, 1985 employee would not receive the one hour overtime in C above but receive the payments in A & B.
Q19. How will initial terminal delay be determined when operating in the 25 mile zone?
A19. 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. The conductor shall record the arrival time at the intermediate point (terminal) for proper payment of the 25 mile zone time.
Q20. Can you give an example of other destinations that would not cause a runaround?
A20. If one employee 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.
Q21. When the UPED agreement becomes effective what happens to existing MPUL claims?
A21. 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.
Q22. Is the identification of the UPED collective bargaining agreement in Article V, a result of collective bargaining or selection by the Carrier?
A22. Since UP purchased the SP system the Carrier selected the collective bargaining agreement to cover this Hub.
Q23. If no applications are received for a vacancy on a prior rights assignment, does the prior right employee forced from the Common Roster or Reserve Board to fill the vacancy have the right to displace a junior prior right employee from another assignment?
A23. Yes. That employee 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.
Q24. Are these guaranteed extra boards?
A24. Yes. The pay provisions and guarantee offsets and reductions will be in accordance with the existing UPED guaranteed extra board agreement.
Q25. Are there any restrictions on routing of traffic or combining assignments on implementation day or thereafter?
A25. 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.
Q26. On implementation will all employees be contacted concerning job placement?
A26. 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.
Q27. Will the Carrier offer separation allowances?
A27. 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.
Q28. When will reserve boards be established and under what conditions will they be governed?
A28. After qualification has been completed in the Salina Hub and prior to reducing employees 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 employees at Salina.
Q29. What options will apply for the Zone 400 trainmen at Oakley?
A29. Three conductors will be offered the option to be assigned to the Salina Hub, those not going to the Salina Hub will be covered under the Denver Arbitration Award.
ARTICLE IV – PROTECTION
Q30. Will any UPED Kansas City employees receive NYD protection as a result of this agreement?
A30. Yes, but only those UPED employees from Kansas City whose applications are accepted at the time of implementation for assignments at Salina except as provided in Q&A56.
Q31. What is automatic certification?
A31. 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.
Q32. How will the test period average be determined?
A32. The parties have to use the calendar year 19S8 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 norms! sen/ice through the centra! corridor, the to use the 1996 calendar year.
Q33. How does the Carrier calculate test period earnings if, for example, an employee missed two {2} months compensated service in 1996?
A33. 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.
Q34. How wi!! an employee be advised of their test period earnings?
A34. Test period averages will be furnished to each individual and the Genera! Chairman.
Q35. How is length of service calculated?
A35. 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.
Q35- How will union officers’ test period average be calculated?
A36. in accordance with past practice pursuant to other merger transactions en the UP system. See tHe March 26,1996 Letter to Mr. Boyd from Mr. Marchant in Attachment “A*. When using the employees above and below for an average, employees working in the same class of service will be used.
Q37. How will the employees know which jobs are higher rated?
A37. The Carrier will periodically post job groupings identifying the highest to lowest pay jobs.
Q38. Will specific jobs be identified in each grouping?
A38. Pools, locals and extra boards may be identified separately but yard jobs and road switchers will not be.
Q39. What rights does an employes have if he/she is already covered under labor protection provisions resulting from another transaction?
A39. 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 Interdivisionai Service the employee may elect to remain under that protection for three years and thsn 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.
Q40, If an employee is from his/her assignment and not immediately notified of the displacement, will their New York Dock protection be reduced?
A40. 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.
Q41. How will reductions from protection be calculated?
A41. 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 unpaid absence of up to 48 hours or part thereof. Absences beyond 48 hours will result in another 1/15 reduction for each additional 48 hour period or part thereof.
2. Five dav 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 assignment – The same process as above except 1/26 for a six day assignment and 1/30 for a seven day assignment
4. Extra board assignments – 1/30 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 1/30 reduction for each additional 24 hour period or part thereof.
NOTE: Absences on the extra board shall be calculated from the time of unavailability (layoff missed call, etc) until the next time called for service. For example; If an employee lays off on Monday at noon, marks up the next day, Tuesday, and does not work until 2 AM on Wednesday, then they shall be off for protection purposes for thirty-eight (38) hours and shall be deducted 2/30 of their protection.
Q42. Why are there different dollar amounts for non-home owners and homeowners?
A42. 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.
Q43. Why is there one price on toss of on sate of home?
A43. 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.
Q44. What is loss on sale of home for less than fair value?
A44. This refers to the loss on the value of the home that 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.
Q45. If the parties cannot agree on the loss of fair value what happens?
A45 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.
Q46. What happens if an employee sells the home for $20,000 to a family member?
A46. 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.
Q47. What is the most difficult part of New York Dock in the sale transaction?
A47. 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.
Q48. Who is required to relocate and is thus eligible for the allowance?
A48. 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.
Q49. Are there mileage components that govern the eligibility for an allowance?
A49. 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.
Q50. Can you give some examples?
A50. 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 non-homeowner determines the amount of the allowance.
Q51. 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?
A51. No the mileage requirements apply to all employees.
Q52. Must MPUL employees and Oakley conductors be forced to an assignment to be eligible for relocation benefits?
A52. No, since they must relocate they may make application for other assignments.
Q53. Will employees be allowed temporary lodging when relocating?
A53. Employees entitled to a relocation allowance shall be given temporary lodging for thirty (30) consecutive days unless they claim the thirty day driving allowance to Salina.
Q54. Is the Reserve Board treated as the highest rated position?
A54. No.
Q55. After all employees are qualified and all positions filled and there is a surplus in the Hub, how are Reserve Board positions allocated?
A55. [Organization to advise]
Q56. Will UPED Kansas City 9th 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?
A56. 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.
Q57. 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?
A57. Yes. When such employees return to active service they will be eligible for NYD protection.
