(3) operate such service free of the imposition of any restrictions as to class of traffic which may be handled or as to the origin or destination of any empty or loaded cars moving in such service; and (4) distribute the mileage ratably as between employees from the seniority districts involved. (d) When an individual carrier not now having the right to establish or enlarge upon such service considers it advisable to establish or enlarge upon the same, on all or any part of its system, appropriate committee of the brotherhood, representing the employees involved, and proper representatives of the carrier will conduct negotiations with respect to the conditions, other than those specified in paragraph (c) hereof which shall apply when such service is established or enlarged upon. (e) The carrier shall from time to time give notice to the general chairman of its intention to establish or enlarge upon such service, whereupon the carrier and the general chairman shall, within 30 days, agree on such other conditions, not inconsistent with items (1), (2), (3), and (4) of paragraph (c) hereof, under which such service may be established or enlarged upon. In the event the carrier and the general chairman cannot agree upon such other conditions, then the parties will select a neutral referee to sit with their respective representatives with authority to decide what other conditions shall be met. If the parties are unable to agree within 10 days upon the selection of said referee, then the National Mediation Board shall appoint the referee upon request of either party. The decision of the referee shall be final and binding upon both parties, except that the award shall not require the carrier to establish or enlarge upon such service. (f) All rules, regulations, interpretations or practices, however established, which conflict with the above shall be eliminated, except that existing rules and practices considered by the carrier more favorable, are preserved. MORE THAN ONE CLASS OF ROAD SERVICE (a) An employee in any class of road service, however designated and whether assigned or unassigned, may be called in advance, or without advance call may upon or after commencing duty be required, to perform more than one class of service during a single trip or tour of duty; and shall be paid for the entire service performed during said trip or tour under the rates and pay rules of that class of service performed which will provide the highest earnings for the entire trip or tour of duty. (b) All rules, regulations, interpretations, or practices, however established, which conflict with the foregoing shall be eliminated. (c) Where a rule, regulation, interpretation, or practice, however established, more favorable to the carrier exists, such rule, regulation, interpretation, or practice may be retained. REPORTING for DUTY (a) In all classes of road service the carrier shall designate, by bulletin, call or otherwise, the time employees shall report for duty, and their compensation will be computed from the time so designated or from the time of actual reporting whichever is later; provided that in assigned road service where employees have a regular time for reporting for duty, and it is desired on any day to defer the reporting time, advance notice shall be given not less than 1 hour before the regular time to report for duty. In such cases the employees' compensation will be computed from the time actually required to report or from the time of actual reporting, whichever is later. (b) All rules, regulations, interpretations, or practices, however established, which conflict with the above shall be eliminated, except that existing rules and practices considered by the carrier more favorable, are preserved. Mr. SHIELDS. I am going now to page 17. The CHAIRMAN. All of that material, of course, will be carried in the record as if read. Mr. SHIELDS. Yes, sir. It will be noted that this settlement proposition laid on the table for discussion subject matter not originally comprised within either our original proposal or that of the carriers. Specifically, the carrier proposition formally introduced: (a) Establishment of the 5-day-40-hour workweek, to be set aside until January 1, 1952, and then to be instituted at the option of the B. of L. E. committees under specified circumstances. The reduced workweek on these terms had been introduced by the carriers and given consideration by us in oral discussions preceding the written proposition of October 18. (b) A basic wage rate increase for road engineers of 5 cents per hour. This issue had also been introduced by the carriers and given consideration by us in oral discussions preceding the written proposition of October 18. The B. of L. E. gave serious consideration to the carrier proposal to provide for and to set aside the 5-day-40-hour workweek, on terms which would give each general committee an option to adopt or not to adopt the reduced workweek. Willingness to agree to the basic features of this proposal, while disagreeing on specific details, has characterized the B. of L. E. position in all phases of the handling of this dispute subsequent to the termination of direct conferences; that is, in mediation, in White House conferences, and in subsequent discussions since January 17, 1951. The carriers have all through these conferences conceded that the B. of L. E. has the right to negotiate this subject matter as though it had actually served the usual notice in accordance with section 6 of the Railway Labor Act. Without laboring the inadequacies of the carriers' wage offers and the abiding and valid reasons for rejecting their proposed rules 6 through 9, it should suffice for this record to indicate that on October 19, 1950, after oral rejection of the carriers' proposition, we made them the following counterproposition: (The matter referred to follows:) 1. Increase the basic daily wage rates, and all differentials, arbitraries, and special allowances of all employees represented by the B. of L. E. by 11.8 percent, with a minimum increase of 23 cents per hour and $1.84 per basic day for yard employees and hostlers, all effective July 1, 1950. In yard service and hostler service existing money differentials above existing standard daily rates shall be maintained. 2. The wage rates thus established to be effective subject to change under the provisions of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, except as provided in section 3 hereof. 3. In the event, and only in the event, that the Federal Government shall, on or before June 30, 1953, impose wage controls upon the carriers and their employees represented by the B. of L. E., or any of them, then in lieu of any other wage rate changes from the date of the imposition of such controls and for their duration only, wage rates of employees of the carriers represented by the B. of L. E. shall be adjusted: (a) Quarterly upward or downward in proportion with changes in the Consumers Price Index, but not below the rates herein established effective July 1, 1950; and (b) Annually effective each July 1 upward by 2.5 percent. Should the system of wage controls imposed by the Federal Government at any time on or before June 30, 1953, preclude the adjustments provided for in subparagraphs (a) and (b) above, or any portion of such adjustments, then and only in that event the B. of L. E. shall be free during the period of such wage controls to propose and to progress proposals for wage rate changes consistent with the principles of wage controls imposed by the Federal Government upon the carriers and their employees represented by the B. of L. E., or any of them. 4. The parties shall continue their conferences on proposals of the employees and the carriers served on or about January 6, 1950, and said proposals shall be handled in accordance with the provisions of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, but sections 1, 2, and 3 hereof are in full settlement of so much of the proposal of the B. of L. E. served on or about January 6, 1950, as relates to upward adjustment of rates of pay in yard and hostler service and to the payment of expenses away from home in road service. The B. of L. E. is willing, concurrently with the execution of an agreement on wages, to give the carriers a letter to the effect that in the event any reduction in the permissible straight-time hours of employees represented by the B. of L. E. in yard and hostler service is effectuated prior to July 1, 1953, it is understood that such employees have already received an 18-cents-per-hour wage increase as insurance to that extent against loss of take-home pay otherwise consequent upon any such reduction in permissible straight-time hours of such employees. Mr. SHIELDS. On October 20, 1950, the carriers made it plain that they were unwilling to make any substantial change in their position. They declined to set aside any of the four rules proposals contained in their October 18 written proposition. They declined to make any upward adjustment in the 23-cents-per-hour increase for yard engineers or in the 5-cents-per-hour increase for road engineers. We, in turn, insisted that we could not continue fruitless discussion on the carriers' terms. Both sides agreed that the conferences had deadlocked, and they were then formally terminated. However, the B. of L. E. wishes to make quite clear that between October 5 and 20 the positions of both sides were quite fully explored, and that both sides argued fully and presented facts claimed to support their respective positions. We wish also to emphasize that the B. of L. E. did not meet the carriers' requests for rules adjustment with an absolute, unqualified, and complete "No." Our position concerning the proposed interdivisional run rule has at all times been that it should be withdrawn, deferred, or remanded for local handling. But we gave serious and somewhat sympathetic consideration to the carriers' complaints which they stated required allowance of their proposals on (a) more than one class of service, (b) reporting time, and (c) expansion of switching limits. We submitted orally and in writing modifications of their language which we felt would accomplish any legitimate demands of the carriers with the least violence to the established rights of locomotive engineers. In a word, we made a strenuous effort to bargain through to a complete settlement. Despite the interchange and discussion of proposals different from and, as already indicated, in some respects beyond the scope of the original proposals, there had been understanding in conference that unless complete settlement could be reached each side would be entitled to revert to its original formal proposals. Developments since service of our January 6, 1950 proposal had made imperative a substantial basic wage rate increased for road engineers; these included, briefly, the sharp rise in the cost of living and the trend of wage rates generally throughout industry and in the railroad industry itself. To protect our formal record on this point our brotherhood determined to file a request for a wage increase for road engineers, and on November 3, 1950, practically all of our general committees presented the following proposition to their carriers. I shall also, with your consent, omit reading that section. (The matter referred to follows:) BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS, railroad DEAR SIR: The undersigned, as representative of the covered by existing agreements between the carrier and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, has been authorized and instructed to participate in a concerted movement to secure certain changes in existing agreements covering rates of pay of those employees. In accordance with the provisions of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, and the current agreement covering rates, rules and working conditions of engineers, motormen, and firemen employed on all classes of locomotives or other power used in road service, please accept this as formal notice of our desire to increase the basic daily wage rates of engineers, motormen and firemen in road service 20 percent, with a minimum running increase of $2.80 on the basic day, effective December 3, 1950. The same percentage of increase applied to the basic daily rates will be applied to all arbitraries, miscellaneous rates, special allowances, and to monthly and daily guaranties. Written acknowledgment will be appreciated and, pursuant to the provisions of the Railway Labor Act as amended, a conference for the purpose of discussing the proposals within 30 days from the date of receipt of this notice is respectfully requested. For your information, will say that identical notice is being served on practically all railroads in the United States. In event settlement is not reached in conference, the railroad is respectfully requested to join with other interested railroads in the United States in creating and authorizing a national conference committee to meet with a similar committee representing the B. of L. E. on the same railroads, for the purpose of handling this matter to a conclusion. --- It is my request that all lines or divisions of railway operated or controlled by the railroad shall be included in settlement of this proposal and that any agreement reached shall apply alike to all such lines of railway. Yours very truly, General Chairman, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers. Mr. SHIELDS. We thus laid before the carriers a request that road engineers receive the same 20 percent increase already asked for yard engineers. In response we received a scattering of further and somewhat different attachments A, proposing further changes in existing rules. Those are the 4, Mr. Chairman, that I referred to some time ago when I was commenting upon the 14 that were received by us in response to our January 6 notice. Immediately following the deadlock on the afternoon of October 20, 1950, the B. of L. E. made informal contact with members of the National Mediation Board with a view to invoking the services of that Board. An effort was then made to obtain the consent of the carriers' committees to the invocation of mediation, and after we had contacted them, the carriers joined us on October 24, 1950, in requesting the services of the Mediation Board. The members of the Mediation Board met separately with the respective parties in a series of sessions commencing October 30 and terminating November 17, 1950. During this period they did not bring us together with the carriers. Our position remained essentially as it had been in direct conferences with the carriers. However, special note should be taken that the B. of L. E. made it plain to the members of the Mediation. Board that three of the four carrier rules proposals, namely: yard switching limits, more than one class of service, and reporting for duty, were negotiable and presented no insuperable obstacles to settlement. We did feel strongly that the interdivisional run issue lends itself to local handling, railroad by railroad, and is unfitted for national handling by its very nature. Our brotherhood did insist that should we give substantial consideration to these carrier proposals it would be necessary that they likewise give consideration to our proposals for guaranties and for expenses away from home. 81733-51—12 The carriers' position as reported to us by the Mediation Board was exactly as outlined orally on the third day of the direct conferences by Mr. Horning. It is fair to state that despite the efforts of the Mediation Board the net result was merely to inform them of the positions and arguments of the respective parties. At this point in time the course of our dispute with the carriers took a somewhat different turn than appears to be contemplated by the terms of the Railway Labor Act. However, the procedures required by that act of the Mediation Board have never been completed, and in our opinion the formal status of our case at the present time is that we are still in the mediation stage of the several steps provided for by the act. The CHAIRMAN. It is now 12 o'clock and the Senate will be in session, Mr. Shields. It is obvious that you will not be able to complete your statement, so we will take a recess now and meet tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock. Mr. SHIELDS. Thank you, sir. The CHAIRMAN. I find we will not be able to meet tomorrow. We have some other committee meetings, and it will be necessary to go over until Thursday. (Whereupon, at 12:05 p. m., the committee recessed until 10 a. m., Thursday, March 1, 1951.) |