BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — The Trump administration said Thursday it was withdrawing a proposal for freight trains to have at least two crew members, nullifying a safety measure drafted under President Barack Obama in response to explosions of crude oil trains in the U.S. and Canada.

A review of accident data did not support the notion that having one crew member is less safe than multi-person crews, Department of Transportation officials said. The withdrawal also seeks to pre-empt states from regulating crew sizes.

The 2016 proposal followed oil train derailments including a runaway oil train in 2013 that derailed, exploded and killed 47 people while levelling much of the town of Lac Megantic, Canada. Other derailments of trains carrying oil and ethanol have occurred in North Dakota, Oregon, Montana, Illinois, Virginia and other states.

Under Obama, regulators concluded that having two or more crew members would be worth the extra cost even if it prevented a single accident.

The rail industry, which long maintained that crew requirements were unnecessary, cheered Thursday’s move.

But a representative for a rail workers union said it would put the public at greater risk by removing a safeguard against accidents. Most trains currently operate with at least two crew members but without a government regulation there’s no guarantee that would continue indefinitely.

“If railroads would start running single person operators, there’s nobody up there to interact to make sure everything is done right,” said John Risch, legislative affairs director for SMART Transportation Division, a rail workers union.

“The government has essentially said we’re not going to provide any oversight whatsoever. Whatever the railroads want to do, they can do,” Risch said.

The Federal Railroad Administration said in a statement that the rail industry has “maintained a strong safety record in the absence of regulation on this issue.”

The statement also said a crew staffing rule would have would have been “an unnecessary obstacle” to future innovation in the industry.

Thursday’s withdrawal marks the latest rollback since President Donald Trump took office of safety rules adopted under Obama in the face of opposition from the energy and transportation industries.

The administration this month eased inspection requirements for offshore oil and gas drilling put in place after the deadly 2010 BP Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill. And transportation officials had earlier rescinded a requirement for more advanced electronic brakes for trains hauling crude and other hazardous fuels.

Railroad company representatives said the withdrawn crew rule would have locked them into crew sizes at a time when the industry is expanding the use of new technologies such as positive train control. Those are computer-based systems that can automatically stop trains to prevent accidents caused by high speed or collisions.

“Allowing railroads the flexibility to adjust their operations to reflect the capabilities of technologies like PTC (positive train control) will help advance railroads’ mission to achieve an accident-free future,” Association of American Railroads President and CEO Ian Jefferies said.

 

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/montana/articles/2019-05-23/us-withdraws-train-crew-proposal-that-came-after-explosions

Brothers,

 Please join us tomorrow for the May Meeting Tuesday May 21 2019

1030 am.

please join us, lunch will be provided after the meeting.

Teamsters Joint Council 42

981 corporate center drive

Pomona ca 91768

Brothers,

 Please join us tomorrow for the April Meeting Tuesday April 16 2019 1030 am.

Brother Duran has procured an insurance representative who is offering income protection.

please join us, lunch will be provided after the meeting.

Teamsters Joint Council 42

981 corporate center drive

Pomona ca 91768

 

 

Brothers,

 Please join us for our February Meeting. General Chairman Carr will be in attendance to go over our progressive new Railroad.

 

Teamsters Joint Council 42

981 Corporate Center Dr, Pomona, CA 91768

Brothers,

 

Unfortunately With The Carrier furloughing so many of our Mechanical brothers and sisters, we will be required to do more daily locomotive inspections.

Remember these are not suggestions they are  requirements to ensure that each locomotive operates safely and efficiently . As the Carrier keeps touting utilization of its assets (of which you are included) Lets not let their bottom line compromise your safety. It is the carriers responsibility to provide a safe workplace from toepaths to locomotives.

Attached is checklist to use when doing a daily inspection. The checklist was created using the Airbrake and Train Handling portion of the GCOR.

please download the attached form and carry it with you

 

Locomotive Inspection Form

-UPDATE –

THEY DROPPED 80 TRUCK LOADS OF ROCK/GRAVEL.

0200 AM IS WHAT THEY ARE SAYING FOR OPENING

Brothers,

 

There is a washout on the Yuma sub 559.2 both tracks. All traffic will be

stopped until fixed. I would Imagine the RE31 and RE10 would be in

standby mode .

Fraternally

Paulo

 

 

Union Pacific Loses Battles on Color-Vision Test.

Feb. 04, 2019 12:01PM

• Must turn over vision testing data in job bias case

• Occupational medicine, safety, disability experts OK

Union Pacific Railroad Co. must fork over information regarding its color vision testing that’s used as part of the company’s fitness-for-duty program, a federal judge ruled.

A proposed class action alleges the company’s fitness-for-duty program discriminates against workers based on disability and genetics.

The new “Light Cannon” vision test is part of the revamped FFD program Quinton Harris and other workers challenge in the suit. They allege that Union Pacific made changes to its FFD program in 2014 to require workers in some positions to disclose certain health conditions so that it may then automatically exclude them from duty.

The workers say the railroad ignores the medical opinions of doctors for the workers as part of the discriminatory scheme and instead relies on the view of its own physician even though he doesn’t examine workers himself. That violates both the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, the suit charges.

Union Pacific isn’t entitled to a court order protecting information about the new color-vision testing from disclosure because there’s evidence that the passage rate of workers was likely higher under its prior vision test and that the new test may not be scientifically reliable, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska said.

The Feb. 1 decision by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon also includes other evidentiary rulings in the case. These include that the workers may present expert evidence from:

•  an occupational medicine doctor regularly involved with FFD determination, who reviewed Union Pacific’s policies, memos, and procedures and found that at least 3,145 workers weren’t cleared to work by the railroad’s doctor or were issued work restrictions after being required to have their fitness for duty tested;

•  a transportation industry safety consultant as to whether the railroad’s interpretation and enforcement of federal safety requirements for railroad workers “is far more restrictive” than it needs to be, provided the workers can first lay a foundation for his testimony; and

•  a long-time Railroad Retirement Board employee regarding that agency’s occupational disability annuity process and, if a sufficient foundation is laid, whether Union Pacific adopted its new FFD program to rid its payroll of more expensive, senior workers.Hildebrand McLeod Law Firm, Nichols Kaster Law Firm, Atwood Holsten Law Firm, and Moody Law Firm represent the proposed class. Baird Holm Law Firm represents Union Pacific.

The case is Harris vs UPRR 2019 BL 33150, D. Neb., No. 8:16CV381, 2/1/19 .

 

Harris v. Union Pac. R.R., No. 8_16CV381, 2019 BL 33150 (D. Neb. Feb. 01, 2019)

Brothers,

 UP is again violating our agreement, the claims process does work however you must submit the claims. the Latest example is the Gemco jobs That travel to West Colton, low 10, low 20, log 44

here are the 3 things that must happen,

1) You handle cars that are not in connection with your train

2) You are within Yard Limits

3) Yard crews are on duty

(a yard has switchmen WC, Shops ,Commerce)

its a 100 mile Yard Day this approximately a 270.00 dollar claim. please hold them accountable

Claim-

on 01/01/19 while assigned to the low10/lof74/log44 I was instructed by(name a manager who told you to do this work) @ mp# within Yard Limits where  switch crews are employed and on duty. (if you know a job number that is on duty that would help) to switch out cars/pick up cars/ car # from (train ID,If you know) “Not in connection with my train or work,” track number /time switching started /time switching ended /where cars were moved from and to/time finished/ time departed.

Now I know your on the engine and dont know the car numbers , but this is a good claim for the trainmen as well .

make sure this is also in your FRA , Not in your FRA didnt happen

Attached is statement of claim on behalf of Los Angeles Service Unit Engineer (name,eid,) October 22, 2015, for a 100 Mile, YARD DAY, while employed in Local Freight service @ co470 ae10 on the LOW 20 The decision rendered by the Timekeeper has been rejected, and I am, therefore appealing it to you in accordance with the provisions of the existing agreement. Engineer X was regularly assigned to LOW 20, and has claimed a 100 Mile, YARD DAY – account instructed to switch cars for the outbound hauler (MWCJY 21) and or purify the yard at the weeds . none of the cars switched were in conjunction with their job and or train . Ordered by MYO Tony Boaten at cx809 at 1030am on 10/22/15 . This was done where Yard Crews are on duty and available(cx809 yla51/) , doing so per Rodger Lambeth. (See Claim #819821600 , dated 10/22/15) I requested that this claim be allowed as presented

1982 UP/SPWL Engineers Agreement Article 11 Section 3a Where regularly assigned to perform service within switching limits, yard engineers shall not be used in road service when road engineers are available, except in case of emergency. When yard crews are used in road service under conditions just referred to, engineers shall be paid miles or hours, whichever is the greater, with a minimum of one hour, for the class of Service performed, in addition to the regular yard pay and without any deduction therefrom for the time consumed in said service. Article 11 Section 4a An engineer operating in other than extra or assigned yard service required to perform yard service at any point where yard engines are employed shall be allowed the yard or freight rate, whichever is the greater, with a minimum of one day. 1986 Arbitration Award 458 Article VIII Sections 1 & 2 – Road, Yard and Incidental Work Section 1 Road Crews Road crews may perform the following work in connection with their own trains without additional compensation: (a) Get or leave their train at any location within the initial and final terminals and handle their own switches. When a crew is required to report for duty or is relieved from duty at a point other than the on and off duty point fixed for that assignment and such point is not within reasonable walking distance of the on and off duty point, transportaion will be provided. (b) Make up to two straight pick-ups at other location(s) in the initial terminal in addition to picking up the train and up to two straight set-outs at other location(s) in the final terminal in addition to yarding the train; and, in connection therewith, spot, pull, couple, or uncouple cars set out or picked up by them and reset any cars disturbed. (c) In connection with straight pick-ups and/or set-outs within switching limits at intermediate points where yard crews are on duty, spot, pull, couple or uncouple cars set out or picked up by them and reset any cars disturbed in connection therewith. (d) Perform switching within switching limits at times no yard crew is on duty. On carriers on which the provisions of Section 1 of Article V of the June 25, 1964 Agreement are applicable, time consumed in switching under this provision shall continue to be counted as switching time. Switching allowances, where applicable, under Article V, Section 7 of the June 25, 1964 Agreement or under individual railroad agreements, payable to road crews, shall continue with respect to employees whose seniority in engine or train service precedes the date of this Agreement and such allowances are not subject to general or other wage increases. (e) At locations outside of switching limits there shall be no restrictions on holding onto cars in making set-outs or pick-ups, including coupling or shoving cars disturbed in making set-outs or pick-ups. Section 2 Yard Crews (a) Yard crews may perform the following work outside of switching limits without additional compensation except as provided below: (i) Bring in disabled train or trains whose crews have tied up under the Hours of Service Law from locations up to 25 miles outside of switching limits. (ii) Complete the work that would normally be handled by the crews of trains that have been disabled or tied up under the Hours of Service Law and are being brought into the terminal by those yard crews. This paragraph does not apply to work train or wrecking service. Note: For performing the service provided in (a)(i) and (ii) above, yard crews shall be paid miles or hours, whichever is the greater, with a minimum of one (1) hour for the class of service performed (except where existing agreements require payment at yard rates) for all time consumed outside of switching limits. This allowance shall be in addition to the regular yard pay and without any deduction therefrom for the time consumed outside of switching limits. Such payments are limited to employees whose seniority date in engine or train service precedes November 1, 1985 and is not subject to general or other wage increases. (iii) Perform service to customers up to 20 miles outside switching limits provided such service does not result in the elimination of a road crew or crews in the territory. The use of a yard crew in accordance with this paragraph will not be construed as giving yard crews exclusive rights to such work. This paragraph does not contemplate the use of yard crews to perform work train or wrecking service outside switching limits. (iv) Nothing in this Article will serve to prevent or affect in any way a carrier’s right to extend switching limits in accordance with applicable agreements. However, the distances prescribed in this Article shall continue to be measured from switching limits as they existed as of July 26, 1978, except by mutual agreement. (b) Yard crews may perform hostling work without additional payment or penalty.