January 17, 2006
Circular No. 315-S
All Local Chairpersons
NKP and portions of Former Conrail
C-T-E
Dear Sirs and Brothers:
This is in regards to the modifications made to the Locomotive Engineer Training Agreement that were implemented on March 5, 2005.
As most of you are aware, shortly after implementation of the modifications the undersigned began receiving complaints that the
Dearborn and Pittsburgh Divisions were not allowing Locomotive Engineer Trainees (LET) to deadhead with their assigned engineer when
he/she was called for separate deadhead service. It appears these two division superintendents took it upon themselves to simply abrogate
the agreement and the provisions that require a LET to be paid $200.00 as an ‘on the job’ trip with his/her engineer. This action many times
caused undue hardship on the LETs when they were held for long periods of time before they could place themselves with another engineer.
This practice also caused the LETs to miss their engineer on subsequent trips because he/she had already been called for another service
trip before the LET could get rested and be available for another call.
The undersigned handled this dispute several times with Labor Relations and had been advised the matter had been corrected only to
find out a short time later the same division superintendents were again not allowing the LETs to deadhead with their assigned engineers.
We again notified Labor Relations of the problem and demanded they correct the problem PERMANENTLY!
From the information being furnished this office, it appears the problem still exists on only two of the five divisions where these
modifications are applicable. Please be advised that I have discussed this matter with our UTU International legal counsel seeking their
opinion as to what action we can take from a legal stand point. I have been advised that our only recourse on this matter is to file penalty
claims for ‘denied seniority’ when the carrier fails to allow a LET to deadhead with his/her assigned engineer. It is imperative that each claim
contain the date, time called, assigned engineer and the assignment the LET was finally forced to work. We also need the times listed
showing how long it was before the LET finally was able to work and if other information that shows they missed working with their assigned
engineer as a result of being held back. If the carrier still refuses to comply with the proper application of the agreed to LET modifications we
will most certainly end up in arbitration.
I have also recently been informed that on the Dearborn Division the carrier is not allowing LETs to work in inclement weather. Here
again there are no provisions that allow the carrier to simply hold a LET back because of inclement weather. This practice is not only
improper, it severely reduces the needed training for a LET as we all know every train handles differently in different types of weather. This
practice also causes an undue loss of wages.
I have discussed this issue with Labor Relations and advised them that it is our position that if LETs are marked up and available for
service and the carrier holds them back because of inclement weather, the LET would be due the $200.00 payment for each trip he was not
allowed to work with his assigned engineer. Should this continue to happen please advise all LETs to file a claim for ‘denied seniority’ with
all the details as outlined above.
In closing, it is imperative that any claim filed in connection with either dispute listed above that all pertinent information be included. I will
keep you apprised of any progress made on these issues.
Fraternally yours,
Delbert G. Strunk, Jr.
General Chairperson
Untied Transportation Union
Cc: All Local Secretaries
This letter has been retyped (in its entirety) to appear clear online.