UTU officials derail in contract disaster

Scan page 5

SOCIALIST ACTIO DECEMBER 1985 5 By J.D. CRAWFORD United Transportation Union (UTU) President Fred Hardin announced on Oct. 29 the ratification of a four-year wage-rule agreement with the major rail carriers in the United States.

Except for slight changes in the pro -cedure to eliminate the job of fireman in the rail industry, the new contract is identical to the proposed agreement that failed in a ratification vote last July.

The contract, which contains sweeping wage-rule concessions, is an unmitigated disaster for all rail workers. Traditionally the agreement signed by the UTU (the largest of some 12 rail craft unions in the United States) sets the pattern for the entire industry.

Some of the more damaging provisions of the new contract include the elimination of the distinction between road and yard work. This provision alone will cost thou -sands of jobs and go a long way toward eliminating the craft of switchman (those rail workers assigned to do yard work).

Without any consultation with the other unions affected, the contract requires road and yardmen to take over and do the work J.D. Crawford is a brakeman/switchman at Burlington Northern Railroad. of other crafts, such as carmen and operators.

In road service, the basic day (the number of miles a crew has to run before it is eligible for overtime) is increased by 8 percent. This constitutes a significant wage cut.

The contract also provides for the elim -ination of cabooses on some trains. And it sets up a special committee to revise down -ward the health and welfare package.

Work without contract

On the basic question of wage rates, this is possibly the worst contract the UTU has ever signed in its history. UTU members are to receive a 10.5-percent increase over the four years of the contract. But even this does not tell the whole story.

UTU members have been working without a contract since June 1984, a total of 16 months. Unfortunately, this has become common practice in the rail industry. But in the past this period was covered by a retroactive wage increase paid shortly after the new contract was ratified.

For the first time there is no retroactive wage increase. Instead, members will receive a one-time lump sum maximum payment of $565. In effect, the 10.5percent increase is not over four years, but over more than five years.

However, the bulk of even this meager •Sim fitt increase will appear only in the last months of the new contract. From July 1, 1984, when the last contract ended, to Jan. 1, 1987 (a period of two-and-a-half years), UTU members will obtain wage increases whose grand total amounts to 4.5 percent.

But possibly the most dangerous aspect of the new contract is the extension of the two-tier wage system. All new hires will start at a pay rate equal to only 75 percent of the rate for present employees. This rate will increase 5 percent a year for five years and then be frozen at 95 percent. This will mean that future union members will never make the full rate of pre-1985 employees.

This will surely create a potential for division and bitterness between new and old members doing the same work for unequal pay. It will also result in increased action by management to get rid of the more costly high-seniority employees.

Vote late, vote yes Those not familiar with UTU contract ratification procedures may be mystified as to how such a contract could possibly be approved.

Rank-and-file members of the UTU do not have the right to vote on their con -tracts. They do not even directly elect the 400 general chairmen who do vote on the contract.

But the real kicker comes in the way the votes are counted. Any general chairman's ballot that is not received, or not received in a "timely fashion" at UTU international headquarters in Cleveland, is counted as a "yes" vote.

This is very convenient. General chair -men who may wish to report to an irate membership that they voted against the contract, but also wish to remain in the good graces of the international official -dom, can just arrange for their ballot to arrive a day late.

When the contract was originally voted down in July, 9i ballots, almost 25 percent of the total vote, were reported as not received in a "timely fashion" and auto -matically counted as yes votes for ratification.

Despite this, the contract was overwhelmingly rejected. It was the first time in the history of the UTU that a proposed international agreement was defeated. The breakdown on the October ratification vote has yet to be made public.

The defeatist mind-set of the UTU the present contract proposals last July.

The "Lake Erie Plan" is a very bad set of proposals. But in truth it is no worse than the contract Hardin just helped ram down the throats of UTU members. In point of fact the two proposals share much in common.

They both agree to sharp reductions in train crew sizes. They both agree to the elimination of cabooses on most over-theroad trains. They both agree to the elimination of the distinction between yard and road work. They both agree to infringement on the work of other crafts. And they both agree to a drastic extension of the two-tier wage system.

The BLE plan differs only in calling for the new sharply reduced train crew to consist of an engineer and an assistant engineer, rather than a brakeman or conductor.

The similarity between these plans is no accident. Hardin, Sytsma, and their underlings believe that the only course of action is to eventually concede to all the demands of the carriers and the National Mediation Board (NMB).

They also both understand that the present course is going to lead to a sharp reduction in rail jobs, which will also mean a sharp reduction in per-capita dues to the international.

----- pull-quotes -----

NOTER WAGES I BERRIE