RULN

Did You Know... Railroad Companies Are Fighting Safety Improvements? | InjuryBoard Kansas City

2012-01-30T23:52:00.000-08:00

Did You Know... Railroad Companies Are Fighting Safety Improvements? InjuryBoard Kansas City

Washougal council discusses coal trains | Camas-Washougal Post-Record

2012-01-30T23:44:00.000-08:00

Washougal council discusses coal trains Camas-Washougal Post-Record

Belgium shuts down to protest austerity measures (VIDEO) — RT

2012-01-30T23:38:00.000-08:00

Belgium shuts down to protest austerity measures (VIDEO) — RT

Unions set to blast Dems for selling out on FAA reauthorization - The Plum Line - The Washington Post

2012-01-30T23:31:00.000-08:00

Unions set to blast Dems for selling out on FAA reauthorization - The Plum Line - The Washington Post

Suit claims BNSF needed ergonomics program | Southeast Texas Record

2012-01-30T23:03:00.000-08:00

Suit claims BNSF needed ergonomics program Southeast Texas Record

WHD News Release: Labor Secretary Hilda L. Solis announces proposed rulemaking to implement statutory amendments to Family and Medical Leave Act [01/30/2012]

2012-01-30T22:59:00.000-08:00

WHD News Release: Labor Secretary Hilda L. Solis announces proposed rulemaking to implement statutory amendments to Family and Medical Leave Act [01/30/2012]

BNSF Customer Notifications - Customer Letters: Update on Rail Collective Bargaining Agreements

2012-01-30T22:48:00.000-08:00

BNSF Customer Notifications - Customer Letters: Update on Rail Collective Bargaining Agreements

Midwest Meets Rigorous BNSF Coal-Dust Mitigation Standards - PR.com

2012-01-29T21:35:00.000-08:00

Midwest Meets Rigorous BNSF Coal-Dust Mitigation Standards - PR.com

Coal Car Topping Dust Mitigation | MIDWEST

2012-01-29T18:13:00.000-08:00

Coal Car Topping Dust Mitigation | MIDWEST:

'via Blog this'

$2 million dollar award for employee of BNSF

2012-01-29T17:50:00.000-08:00

BNSF Railway opens $35 million railcar service facility in Minot, along with inspection tracks - Daily Journal

2012-01-28T19:33:00.000-08:00

BNSF Railway opens $35 million railcar service facility in Minot, along with inspection tracks - Daily Journal

Summary of BNSF Railway Safety Coordinators Meeting

2012-01-26T06:22:00.000-08:00

Summary of BNSF Railway Safety Coordinators Meeting

Meeting Date: October 11, 2011

Attendees: Mark Schulze, vice president, Training, Safety and Operations

Dave Freeman, vice president, Transportation

BNSF Safety Department management and staff

BNSF Transportation Department management

United Transportation Union (UTU) and Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) safety coordinators, representing each division

Dr. Thomas Pace, assistant vice president, Medical and Environmental Health and medical team

Jeff Wright, regional vice president, Operations

Corporate Relations staff (Andrea Scott and Jan Taylor)

Melinda Brown, communications consultant

Meeting Time: 0945 - 1500

Meeting Place: TOB, Large Conference Room A

Meeting Opened By: Rickey Rooks, director, Occupational Safety and Environmental Health at 0945.

Rickey Rooks – Welcome

Safety Briefing (Rickey Rooks)

Ø Briefing covered:

§ Medical emergencies (CPR, First Aid, AED and aid assignments)

§ Severe weather emergency – designated area (present room)

§ Fire – evacuation responsibility for your table and exits

§ Cell phones to silent status

Ø Agenda overview

Ø Introduce Mark Schulze

Safety Vision (Mark Schulze) Mark opens with 2011 Safety Dashboard

2011 has been a trying time for all of us, intolerable and not consistent with our safety vision. After two fatalities in 2010, we have had eight in 2011. While we have made great progress where injuries are concerned, we are not successful if our co-workers can’t make it home.

2011 2010 % Variance

Fatalities 8 1 +800%

Reportable Injuries 415 506 -18%

Reportable Injury Ratio 1.34 1.79 -25%

Total Injuries 1,004 1,241 -19%

Ø We have too much variability – we must make sure we are consistent.

Ø Slip, trip and fall leads injuries, with overexertion next.

Ø Collision/impact has also gone up – in fact there was a collision just yesterday (10/10/11) in the Sand hill subdivision of Powder River. No injuries, but still a significant incident. We must stop the trend of derailments – especially the human factor in the yard, speeding.

Ø Here are the safety expectations (get slides).

o Each and every employee goes home safely

o Each and every employee is committed to safety

• 100% rules compliance

• 100% of the time

o Not about adding more rules

• Eliminate at-risk behaviors

• Focus on accountability

Ø We are not adding rules; we believe our safety goals are attainable. Focus on the Four Elements of Safety:

o Culture

o Resources

o Training

o Empowerment (make sure our employees all act in a safe manner)

Ø We are have undertaken three separate but complimentary efforts to assess BNSF’s safety organization, systems, processes and technology

o Safety Assessment

• Comprehensive safety assessment covering multiple functions and locations

o Terminal “Deep Dive” Cultural Assessment

• Develop an understanding of BNSF yard/terminal culture to gain a better understanding why BNSF continues to have fatalities and life changing injuries

o Serious Injury and Fatality Analysis

• Develop a system-wide review to improve understanding of why injuries at BNSF have steadily declined while serious injuries and fatalities have remained flat

Ø This summer Behavioral Science Technology (BST) conducted a comprehensive safety assessment covering multiple functions and locations within BNSF headquarters and field locations.

Ø 10 Dimensions of Safety – Vision, Leadership, Structure, Culture, Engagement, Expertise, Exposure, Enabling Systems, Sustaining Systems, Scorecard – the assessment had a rating system of 0-60. BST assessed BNSF and benchmarked us against the rest of the country. Our score was 34 out of 60.

Ø BNSF will focus on three key things:

1. Best Way Safety

2. Systems Impacting Safety

3. Behavioral Based Safety Expansion

Ø All of this is leading to the kick off of a major safety initiative – Best Way Safety (Slide 14) – within the next 30-60 days.

o Organizational Design

o Roles and Responsibilities

o Toolset

o Metrics/Scorecard/Measures

o Standardized Processes

o Meetings

In summary – we have made progress, but we MUST eliminate serious injury and fatalities.

(Handoff to Dave Freeman, vice president, Transportation)

BNSF Update (Dave Freeman)

Ø It is very important that we bring this group together – each of us, with all of the employees on our teams are critical to success in safety. Today, we’ll talk about BNSF Safety, get a BNSF business update and have a Q&A.

Ø We’ll start with safety – our numbers and stats. Eight fatalities is the number one point – that tells us we have work to do in safety. We clearly have opportunities. We had a difficult start to 2011 and that has continued on. Our general chairman and safety coordinators must recognize that eight is clearly the opportunity to improve – and the company as a whole must work to this.

Ø We must work through the issues that make us struggle with behaviors, operating plans and procedures. We see a lot of good things as well – individual safety efforts, along with colleagues and crews. These good things should be the foundation, so we can work for zero fatalities, injuries and incidents.

Ø Let’s look at the collision yesterday – the lead train stopped, there were cattle moving across; and the following train didn’t comply with the restricted speed warning form signal. This incident and half a dozen others should be data points for us. We are all out there every day and must constantly be on our toes – all here are leaders, and we still have work to do.

Ø Q. (From the floor) What about Best Way safety? How does that look?

A.Dave stated that we have to look at the overall study (from BST) and ask – What can the organization do with behaviors, decisions – there are a lot of issues involved. BST gave us feedback on our organizational structure and workforce, as well as actions to take. First, there will likely be some changes in the organization in the rest of 2011 and into 2012. Second, expectations of safety will likely become more consistent throughout the railroad. These best practices will become routine – it will take time, but is critical to our success. Third, we will likely struggle with all of the pieces involved, including OPT testing, ERP and other issues.

Our real world and behavior is complex. How do we deal with it to meet expectations of the FRA and build strong relations between all 40,000 people? Our OPT testing is a big question – how do we improve? We got a huge set of feedback points from BST and it will take some time to think through it. We will need all BNSF family members unified.

Let’s look at KC/Argentine terminal operations – we have the rules in place. Are we comfortable with the production and safety balance in KC specifically, as well as other locations?

How do we balance production/safety – there is often a sizable gap between what we say and the behaviors of the people in the terminal. What are the dynamics causing issues between safe production and behavior? KC not that much different from other divisions/subdivisions. We have to take the results at KC to develop a specific KC plan and a bigger plan. Issues in KC are closely parallel to other locations.

We have plenty of opportunities here to learn more, and we’ll share with the FRA and NTSB as a part of the larger investigation. How can we take that incident and apply our findings across the whole system? What are we doing that drives employees to put themselves at risk? We must look at the issues from a system perspective and change behavior, communications and actions. Eight is the number to think about. Zero is where we need to be.

Losing a colleague is THE worst working day of your career. We must collectively work to zero.

Every effort is part of the puzzle to drive numbers to zero.

Ø Q. BNSF is up in fatalities, where is the industry?

A. Dave noted that we are about equal in the industry from 2010 to 2011, with yard fatalities up year over year.

Ø BNSF Business Update

Business is good. Last two weeks have been the first two weeks where we have handled over 200,000 loads since 2008 (the start of the recession). We are doing well to handle our business and get new business. Four business units are working well:

1. Intermodal

2. Coal

3. Merchandise and Industrial Products

4. Agriculture

Around the network, all the divisions have been busy. While we are still a little nervous on the economy, our numbers are a little stronger than the overall economy. We should also see an International peak and the UPS peak after Thanksgiving. For 2012, we anticipate growth of 3-5%.

Ø We have a big hiring plan this year to next. Transportation is hiring 2,300 this year and 1,400 next year (2012 hiring slightly over attrition). Overall, BNSF is hiring 4,000 this year, and plans to hire over attrition next year.

Ø As far as capital expenditures, we are looking at $3.8B this year and $3.75 to $4B next year, including 850 miles of rail, bridge projects and buying locomotives. Flood impact – we’ll spend $350 to $400M rebuilding the railroad a as result of the floods, some expenses are covered by insurance, but it takes 2-3 years to resolve – meaning we have a lot of out-of-pocket costs. We have to do it – we must put all the subs back into service. This was not part of our capital plan, and is a big impact, but we will overcome it.

Ø We are working to speed up the network over four business units:

o Coal – 500 coal sets moving around , record amounts of coal over the next six months; tons of coal over the routine plan this month and as much as we can move this quarter into Q1 of 2012.

o Intermodal – 65-70% number in some lanes; 1500 units running this weekend. Must push 1540 trains on the network this week, the highest number this year.

o Industrial – fracking sand and crude oil heavy.

o AG side – very heavy – with a big surge in the northwest.

We have to work on velocity service and meeting customer expectations.

Ø Q. How are we doing with the FedEx project?

A. (Dave) Overall, the contract is going well. They are happy – Fred Smith (CEO) visited the railway six weeks ago. We are taking a piece of their third level business, 15,000 units a year in Chicago, California and Dallas. We did extremely well, now running 30,000 units a year, maybe 60,000 units next year. The line has been very positive, the relationship very solid – although we must be careful in managing both UPS and FedEx relationships and schedules.

Ø Q. How many locomotives are short on the system and how are we addressing?

A. (Dave) We’re holding eight trains. GE will deliver 30 to us this year and we have a huge plan for next year to get new locomotives. We’ll be short – should have a drop in International and AG after Thanksgiving. Should have enough next year and be in much better shape now than earlier in the year.

Ø Q. Are we still buying only GE trains-LOCO?

A. Dave stated that we will not be buying all GE trains LOCO going forward.

Ø Q. What is the impact of BNSF and the coal mines in Montana?

A. (Dave) There are huge coal reserves in southeast Montana and a plan to open a new mine there. We plan to open a line between Mile City and the new mine, not sure how. The long term play is to haul coal from the export city – clearly a positive impact on BNSF for new business, but will take time. By 2015, 2016, there should be an operational mine.

Ø Q. Do we plan to purchase lighter weight, lower horsepower (intermediate) locomotives?

A. Dave said that we won’t be buying smaller locomotives. We will refurb our existing ones and supplement with leasing. We’ll be buying larger locomotives as a part of pour plan (although could be subject to change).

Ø Q. Where is PTC? Have we started equipping locomotives?

A. Dave told us that BNSF PTC plan is very active and has been for the past two years. We plan to spend $1.7B to complete 78 subdivisions. We did 12 last year, 22 this year and a similar number next year. Large number of signal employees and contractors doing the construction work. BNSF does the cutovers. We’ve spent about $300M this year and a little more next year. We plan to turn on PTC across the railroad by 2015.

There are a lot of negotiations going on in D.C. about extending the date – we will continue on a 2015 plan. We are also replacing older technology in signal equipment as a part of the PTC plan. We’ll pull CapEx out of 2019 and 2020 as a part of the foundation of PTC – it is huge for moving trains safely. For the second part of the question, six or seven years ago, we started outfitting locomotives with technology, adding PTC. Plan to outfit 1,000 locomotives in 2012.

Ø To close – zero is the number. All of us and our colleagues must work together to achieve this.

Wellness Program and the Medical Team

Ø Dr. Pace, introduce the team: Mike Ray, Amber Matthias, Candy Young, Adrienne Coons

Ø The challenge for wellness has five top disease states:

1. Hypertension

2. Diabetes

3. Joint degeneration - back

4. Joint degeneration - neck

5. Heart disease

Ø Our vision is to create a culture of wellness at BNSF that encourages healthy behavior, supports healthy decision making, and inspires positive change. Our mission is to help our employees eat better, be more physically active, and make healthier lifestyle choices. BNSF wellness started in 1997, with a big initiative in 2009 to start the OEC – Online Wellness Center. Now we are getting out into the divisions and one-on-one in the field. Be sure to take a look at the wellness site – we are looking at putting a link on the external Web for families to access from home.

Let’s talk about ‘Your Health Matters 2011’:

Ø We wanted to create a wellness program that will provide value to a broad spectrum of the BNSF employee population. The program will address unique BNSF needs and be customized to match the organizational culture of both the field and campus environments. We also want to incorporate wellness into safety and hazardous situations.

Ø The program has two basic components, the upgrade of “Your Health Matters” and the development and rollout of the Field Wellness Initiative.

Ø The program will be offered as a voluntary benefit to employees.

Ø Program will evolve to emphasize personal contact and outreach as much as practicable to better engage employees. We want to put the information out there and build the right platform.

Ø Personal health information will remain confidential. Companywide aggregate trends will be used to determine future programming needs.

Ø Begin with a pilot program consisting of a Wellness Director and three Divisional Wellness Managers (Kansas, Northwest, Chicago, Texas/FW).

Ø We’re going to have targeted field support and plan to expand on what’s good. We also want to introduce new things in the field that have worked well on campus like health fairs, demonstrations and other health services and manage local health and wellness related vendors and programs.

Ø We want to have 1-on-1 coaching and small group interaction, and provide a two-way communication link.

Ø Our BNSF wellness program is starting out with three field pilot programs – first we have Amber Mathias, the wellness manager for the Kansas Division.

Ø Amber Matthias - We want to make sure that we have personalized support in the field, including:

o Wellness Programs

o Field Wellness Managers

o Medical Plan Resources

o EAP Counselors

o Operation Stop

o PIPP

o 24-hour nurse line

Ø We also offer education programs:

o Health Screenings and Health Fairs

o Articles in BNSF and Division News

o E-Mail Health Tips

o Online Wellness Center

Ø And incentives:

o Free wellness program materials

o Participation prize drawings

o Smoking Cessation reimbursement ($250)

o Preventive care benefits through medical plan coverage

Ø Q. What is PIPP?

A. Amber answered that PIPP is a program where we send teams out to help the field work on stretching exercises.

Ø Candy Young, Northwest Division – Texas will be coming on board next for our pilot program of division wellness management – we’ll be working with the different crafts to see what works best. Education is so important and we’ll focus on:

o Health Modules

o Daily/Weekly Health Briefings

o 1-to-1 Coaching

o Small Group Presentations (Diabetes/Cholesterol/High Blood Pressure/Weight Management/Sleep & Energy)

Ø We also offering programming:

o Walking challenges with pedometers

o OWC contests

o Fitness Center Discounts – 24 Hour Fitness and also through health insurance

o Division Specific Programming – customized to crafts and division needs

Ø We’ll be working to create a ‘template’ for a sustainable program that we can quickly introduce to new divisions with a quick ramp up and launch.

Ø Q. Can you help us with a ‘grocery list’ for a 2:00 AM call?

A. What are the top items that are easy to pack, easy to store and sustainable? This is one of the items on our ‘to do’ list to get this done for the divisions, along with traveling fitness bags – part of our plan for 2012 both pilot programs and on a systemic basis.

Ø Q. What foods counter the effects of fatigue? Also, what are some fatigue counter measures?

A. These are good topics that we are working on now for information and how to deliver (such as in the safety meetings).

Ø Adrienne Coons, Chicago Division – I’m going to talk about our choices for drinks – we call this “Think Your Drink.”

Ø Conducted exercises with volunteers for the most popular drinks – rank by calories and sugar:

o 20% of all drinks – soft drinks - 512 calories (and 128 grams of sugar)

o 11% milk – 440 calories

o Monster drink – 200 calories

o Black coffee – 15 calories

o Water – 0 calories

Ø When you think about a 2000 calorie diet, one Big Gulp is ¼ of total calorie intake. A Starbucks white chocolate mocha has 580 calories – compared to a Big Mac that has 540. Both have more than 20 grams of fat. We also must think about the ‘sugar bump’ a quick lift, but then we crash.

Ø Conducted another volunteer exercise to rank caffeine in drinks:

o Milk - 10 mg

o Soft drink – 150 mg

o Monster 160 mg

o Coffee 350 mg

Ø You feel the effects of caffeine six hours later, so think about your day and how it affects your day.

Ø Q. What about diet big gulp – no calories and sugar?

A. You still get a big dose of caffeine, and your body may be craving sugar if you want a big soft drink.

Ø Q. How does all that fat get in a Big Mac?

A. They use a lot of fillers in the meat, and the mayonnaise in the topping (sauce) is heavy; Fast food is cheap, not healthy. Moderation is the key to high fat and high sugar foods.

Ø Q. What about five hour energy products?

A. It’s all about balance, no extreme highs and lows – these products do bring you up, but the crash is bigger. Try milk or a small snack instead.

Ø Q. What about Red Bull?

A. Red Bull has been banned in certain areas – you have to consider your body weight and medical conditions – take care with all energy drinks.

Ø We have ‘Stop and Go’ books that shows food from different restaurants and rates them – send the Wellness Team a request and we can send you one.

Ø Q. Calories vs. fat – what is more important?

A. Calories count the most – check the serving size, also check the fat. It all depends on your personal health goals.

Ø Q. How does sodium affect us – is it like caffeine?

A. Sodium is not much of a stimulant, but impacts blood pressure, so watch your sodium intake.

Ø Statement from the floor – Employees don’t always have good lodging, we need good contract lodging so employees can get a good night’s sleep and safe places to exercise or walk. There are also no good places to eat and get healthy food on the road.

Break for lunch

Call meeting back to order – Rickey Rooks

Ø Action Log Update – for job aids, we’ll have team manuals posted on the intranet and made available to all employees. They don’t take the place of storybooks (they don’t have pictures) and the storybooks will still be posted, complete with pictures.

Ø Introduce Jeff Wright, Regional Vice president, Operations for the CPA lineup safety updates.

V. CPA Lineup Safety Updates (Jeff Wright)

Ø We’ve had lineup problems for a longtime. We have to use NOC Best Way – for Powder River, flood support for Colorado, Nebraska and Twin Cities, then moving on to Texas and Springfield.

Ø Our crew plan accuracy started in January, with Powder River – we’ve had service interruptions in the North, but are now moving in a positive trend. Must operate trains on time, then the lineups will get better.

Ø Let’s look at some of the divisions – Southwest and California are doing a good job on CPA, focused on lineup. Where NOC Best Way is implemented, we’re seeing good numbers. Most are getting better from 59-82% over the last seven days. We can send some specific data out later.

Ø Q. What are the criteria for accuracy?

A. Jeff said it’s a snapshot of six hours every day, pushed out 12-16 hours (four times a day), plus or minus three hours of when they said they would go to work.

Ø Q. When was California rolled out?

A. Jeff answered that it was last – Kansas and Gulf rolled out, then California and California is doing a good job.

Ø We are looking at Dilworth and Minot as a joint effort – we will look at both terminal and NOC Best Way to improve velocity. Success comes not just from the NOC but from the terminals as well. Seeing improvement after coming out of the flood situation – lineups get better as the trains are on time. We will continue to make lineups better, but we’ll always have some issues. We’ll be well into 2012 for implementing the rest of the divisions.

o Dave Freeman noted that we’ll also continue to work with the FRA on accuracy and will continue to get data to the general chairmen.

Ø Rickey Rooks gave a quick technology update – the thin clients in the field can’t print. In 2012, we’ll start the process of changing out in the field with replacement PC’s to enable printing.

o Also, we have a report on the lightning strikes software installed on PCs – the software is really slowing down the computers. Overall the system works well, but it’s not portable (no GIS) so it’s an issue for MOW. Someone has to be on site to monitor the system. Since the software locks up the yardmaster system, we should turn off the software when the storm actually hits and bring the crews in.

o We have the weather data in place, so bring the crews in so you don’t have to work in the lightening. Just bring the crews in for bad weather. We need to get this in special instructions and standardized in the existing safety rules for mechanical.

VI. Caucus Updates (John Krueger, BLET and Louie Costa, UTU)

Ø John – thanks to Rickey for the pizza; Louie – thanks to the general chairmen.

Ø We’ll start with an issue on the eight fatalities this year – in particular the crew vans.

Ø Q. How are we addressing the situations with the crew vans and how can we make it safer? Can we spend less time in the vans – get more efficient and safer?

A. Dave Freeman answered - with strategy. We had two incidents in Longview and Montana. In Longview, we had driver failure – the driver failed to stop at a stop sign. In Montana, the van was hit by a diver allegedly under the influence – there is a big ongoing investigation. It looks like our driver did the best he could. We fully recognize the hazards of vehicle operation – that certain times and places are more dangerous.

We don’t want people in vans as much as possible. Minimize crew deadheading. We don’t want crews out in the middle of the night in vans. We routinely audit the van companies, their vehicles and employees. When we get reports from the crews, we take the issues to the van companies. All crews should report vehicles that don’t appear to be safe.

We’re also working to minimize deadheads. Some divisions have guidelines on deadlines. We are a 24X7 business – so we can’t eliminate, but we can work to improve operations – with less deadheading, safe vans and safe drivers. We recognize our part – but there is no immediate fix. We have to move our workforce, but we understand the caucus concern about moving the workforce. To some degree, we are at the mercy of the road.

Ø Q. What access do we have to the van companies’ safety and accident prevention programs?

A. Dave Freeman said that we have full scale documentation from each company. Todd Nicholson will be coming in on Wednesday (10/12/11) and can provide additional info on that. We can stipulate the safety criteria to the van companies.

Ø Q. If coordinators had access to the van safety programs, it would help.

A. If we have coordinators who want access to the van companies’ safety programs that would be fine. We can also attend the van companies’ safety meetings.

Ø John Krueger – The Chicago and Kansas divisions have a van safety hotline to call. Issues are worked out once a week with the van provider.

Ø Q. We have a concern that treatment of van safety is not consistent across all divisions.

A. Dave Freeman answered that we encourage interaction with all divisions.

Ø Q. Louie Costa – MOW has a driving school program – do the van companies have this driving school?

A. Dave Freeman - The Smith School is a good program and is used in different areas.

Ø Q. (Comment) We’ve requested that SW15 locomotives be retrofitted with air conditioning. Since we have no plans to purchase lightweight locomotives to help, what can we do – this issue has been on the cab committee log since 2003. We need a plan for retrofitting locomotives with air conditioning this winter. John Krueger added… We should include yard engines and road switches – they are sweat boxes. We shouldn’t limit air conditioning to the west, all units should get help – it’s health and injury related.

A. Dave Freeman stated that he didn’t have enough information to answer that right now. It’s a valid point – it’s not appropriate to draw dividing lines geographically. Do the RVPs have comments?

Jeff Wright – We’ve historically put AC in the hottest areas, but we have hot weather everywhere. We won’t put AC in ALL assets, especially if they may not have long term use. But we will look into and create a plan – we’ll have to look at what’s equipped and what’s out there.

Louie Costa – We’ll put this on the action log.

Ø Q. (Comment from the floor Rick Olson) It’s been a fight to get both AC and heat working properly in locomotives – we need heat and cool, toilets that work, microwaves and other ‘creature features’ and necessities.

A. Louie Costa – We’ll follow up to the caucus. We need to empower employees to get to a safe, healthy place – it has an impact for the front line.

Ø Q. In Murray Yard in September, we had a new engineer who had never worked solo, working with a new conductor, who was concerned about safety. The frontline supervisor contacted the trainmaster – he was told to perform service or be removed from service. This is frustrating when we have discussions about changing culture. Employees take safety concerns to frontline supervisors and get shut down. MCOs feel pressure to get bodies – some not committed to safety over production. How can we educate and convince the workforce to do the right thing for safe performance?

A. Dave Freeman - I don’t have a lot of details on this specific issue. Clearly there are times when we have a breakdown. Leadership must set expectations for empowering and respect. The right answer may be somewhere in the middle. I would like to think that what happened in Murray Yard is not the norm. Don’t put unqualified people out on the line – shut the train down until we have qualified personnel.

The dynamics of how we behave and problem solve have to be a part of how we operate going forward. We need to work at all levels of the organization to gather facts, consider perspectives, and implement a safe plan. It is a weakness for us.

Relationships between frontline supervisors and crew need to improve. The challenge with this group and all of BNSF is to improve skills and abilities. We need superintendent or GM to quickly solve the problem with no safety implications. We have work to do here – to communicate, solve problems, and with behavior.

Ø Comment from the floor: How things get handled matter – safety coordinators have to change the mindset.

A. Dave Freeman replied that General Managers and their teams have to take this on. Look at the whole discipline process find alternated handling of escalation, must have a reasonable process for handling discipline and decision making. The RVPs give a lot of thought to the escalation process – there are a lot of parts to the communication process.

Louie – Don’t use the word’ empowerment’ – just make it a standard. Still do the work, but speak up about safety.

Dave – If someone has to use the word’ empowerment’, then empowerment is not working.

Ø Q. On track flagging – all Form B should have track flags, except for floating.

A. Dave Freeman – we have our arms around that.

Ø Q. What about initiatives on 6.5?

A. Rickey Rooks stated that we have a video on that we can send out.

Ø Q. We can’t retrofit cars, but when we work on air hoses under the cars, it can be dangerous (showed photos on screen). We need best practices for working under cars.

A. Louie Costa answered that he would take that to the AAR meeting in November.

Ø Suggestion from the floor: Can we use the expertise in the room to draft a best practice for this situation and institutionalize a best practice for it? (fix for angle caulk in center of seal)

A. Louie – I will set up a subcommittee to set this up. We’ll get the coordinators to give ideas for Mike and get it to the safety team (will send photos along).

From the floor – Also need to look at Best Way, crew lineup - keep a constant eye on deadheading – lineup was the single biggest topic of the caucus.

VII. Division Presentations

Ø Texas Division - Darren Taylor (UTU) and Mark Morton(BLET)

Status and Texas Division Partnership Goals for 2011 vs. 2010 YTD as of 9/15/11

Topic 2010 2011 % Chg Target

Rep. Injuries 21 26 +19% 27 w/ 3 million hrs.

Total Injuries 53 45 -15%

Freq. Ratio 2.07 2.36 +12% 1.80

Severity Ratio 109.72 109.44 -1%

Shoving Incidents 13 4 -69% -25%

Decertifications 30 15 -50% -50%

HFRI 41 30 -27%

o At 8:50 p.m. on May 23^rd, a switchman suffered a triple amputation after falling from a hopper car in Ft. Worth.

o At 8:40 p.m. on August 11^th, a switchman suffered a crushing injury to the left hand after slipping from the step of a moving locomotive in Ft. Worth.

o A Life Critical Decision Committee (LCD) was created as a result of the increasing number of fatalities and serious injuries. The committee, comprised of TY&E, MOW & MEC, look at the incidents and ops test failures, that involve the 8 Deadly Decisions, 7 Critical Decisions and 7 Safety Absolutes to eliminate incidents involving these critical work events on the Texas Division.

o Findings from the LCD Committee are used in P2P efforts, using local chairmen, safety coordinators and safety assistants to communicate that our exposure to risk is there and we must change the behavior around LCD’s.

Vision achieved through:

a. Boots on the ground effort with cooperation from the local chairmen.

b. Safety coordinator new-hire contacts division wide.

c. Safety coordinator participation in new-hire skills assessments.

d. Findings were presented to the division SST Chairmen.

Ft. Worth Terminal Superintendent Shared Goals

2010 vs. 2011

Rep. Injuries 7 11

HFRI 28 17

Shoving Incidents 8 2

Oklahoma City Terminal Superintendent Shared Goals

2010 vs. 2011

Rep. Injuries 5 6

HFRI 12 9

Shoving Incidents 4 1

o In Oklahoma City a lot of positive things have happened – employee recognition is more individual, developed processes for switching on the south end of the bowl yard. ARC City and Wichita Falls are success stories – based on employee/supervisor relationships:

Employee / Supervisor Relationships

Prideful Engaged Motivated Credible

Achieved through:

Respect

Accountability

Communication

Expectation

Created a Peer Support Team

Training for all members presented by the EAP Manager

Established the process for notification of critical incidents

Enhanced Safety Training (EST)

Ark City 90 Completed

Oklahoma City 96 Completed

Ft. Worth 167 On Going

Wichita Falls 32 On Going

Madill 24 On Going

409 50% Complete

o Training Coordinators continue to assist and develop new-hire training coordinators at Madill, Ft. Worth & Wichita Falls and build relationships with new-hire classes. Motto – Be Safe 4 Them – think of four people who would suffer if you were injured or killed. Do you care?

Ø Q. (From Dave Freeman) With regards to the triple amputation incident, what is the dynamic behind the crew decision (here) and how do we close the gap?

A. Sometimes (the crew) makes bad decisions for an early quit – if it’s really hot or cold, or if they need to get somewhere. Also sometimes the expectations and the culture of the group affect it – these switch moves were acceptable – should take an extra hour to do it more safely. Everyone in Ft. Worth and management agreed that move should change.

Ø Montana Division - John Partridge (BLET) and Brent Michael (UTU)

EST Rollout

o Covered preventive measures for the Montana Division’s three leading causes of injuries: (walking, lining switches and handbrakes).

o Professionalism

o SIRP process

o Video and discussions of similarities between what goes on in the cockpit of an airplane and a locomotive cab.

o Situational awareness, and listening to your instincts.

o Whitefish 85% attendance

o Glendive and Forsyth +70% *

o Glasgow and Havre 30% *

o Great Falls is just starting *

impacted by floods, rerouting, and manpower.

REACT – Reduce Exposure and Train Control - We must drill in restricted speed – start a grass roots effort to create the right mindset to reduce in-cab distractions. Never lose awareness and realize our own shortcomings.

o Labor driven, proactive approach to prevent authority violations.

o Helps crew identify critical situations and focus on in cab communication relating to train authority.

o Create a “mindset” to reduce in cab distractions.

o Convey the seriousness of authority violations potential for loss of income, pain and suffering from injury, or even the loss of life.

o Territory specific to the type of authority: TWC or block signal (CTC or ABS)

o Rolled out at Havre, Great Falls, and Whitefish

We also have a program of Improved Safety Involvement – more direct employee involvement, rolled out in Glasgow, goes into the Glasgow terminal safety book.

o Van and Facility audits

o Marathons and Peer to Peer activities

o Safety Celebrations

o Health Fairs and local safety projects

o High-visibility safety projects outside of normal monthly meetings help dispel negative perceptions about safety participation in terminals.

Ø Q. Do you include near misses and close calls?

A. Yes, take those stories to other groups.

Ø Colorado Division Presentation - Mike LaCrue (BLET) and Pat Engebrecht (UTU)

We practice goal setting – we do this every year. We start by measuring safety:

o Partnership Safety Goals

o Meet quarterly w/SC, GM, MS, Supts.

o Overall Safety Division wide

o Site Team Safety Goals, all locations

o Goals set at first of year

o Reviewed monthly

o Injury Reduction, HFI’s, Authority Violations

o Ways to improve, what have we learned? Site team goal is 0.

o We all want perfection, show continuous improvement

o Make goals short term

o More opportunities to celebrate success

Safety Performance Goals

o TY&E Injury Frequency Ratio - 1.90

o To date – 2.11 vs. 2.00 (6% increase)

o Reduce TY&E Combined Rep/Non-Rep Frequency Ratio by 10%

o To date – 4.79 vs. 6.17 (22% reduction)

o Reduce total Authority Violations by 25%

o To date – 18 vs. 18

Reducing Risk in 2011

o Authority violations our biggest opportunity - this year we’ve done some things a little differently:

o Assisted site teams with developing risk reduction programs

o Share programs division wide

o REACT

o Take 5

o Throttle Reminder (where authority ends)

o Coordinator Communication

o Distributed weekly via e-mail

o Division Maps and posters at on duty locations

o Safety Marathons

o Enhanced Safety Training (EST) modules

o Monthly Safety Coordinator call

o “100 Days of Summer” Summer Spike program – reduce by 33% HFRI, injury, authority violation

o Constructed route familiarization books for transfer employees

o One on one contacts at on duty locations with transfers explaining REACT and Take 5 programs

Stats:

o 26 total Authority Violations in 2010

o 14 violations in 4 month period prior to implementation of Risk Reduction Programs

o Since REACT and Take 5 implementation

o 11 violations in 7 month period

o 8 – Track Warrant Control

o 1 - Red Signal

o 2 – Form C

o 2011 Authority Violations - 18

o 12 – Denver South

o 6 – Denver North

o After REACT and Take 5 implemented in March, authority violations went down, then rose again in July, August and September – need constant reinforcement

Showed examples of safety posters and throttle guides.

Topics for EST 2011:

o Intro to Safety

o SMART Clickers – SIRP, Empowerment, JSB

o 2010 Authority Violations – Minimizing Distractions

o REACT

o Take 5

o Generations 2011 – how best to communicate with different generations in the workforce

o Risk – Avoiding Complacency

o Peer to Peer (How’s It Goin?) – change behavior with peer to peer program

Attendance to date - 225

With the flooding situation, re-routes stopped safety meetings in July – saw the trend go back up. We need to continue briefings, get to ALL outside locations.

We’ve also done a lot of employee appreciation – include all on duty in heavy volume locations – including mechanical, MOW, railroad tie production gangs – and gotten a good response.

Ø Q. (From the floor) What is your theory on authority violation?

A. Two form C’s – stop and protect; crew thought they didn’t miss it – but they did and overlooked speed.

Ø Q. What changed?

A. Awareness must be spot on – a lot of guys come from different territories – changing authorities.

1505: Rickey Rooks closed meeting.

NLRB Social network postings about work

2012-01-26T05:16:00.000-08:00

To help provide further guidance to practitioners and human resource professionals, NLRB Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon has released a second report describing social media cases reviewed by his office.

The Operations Management Memo covers 14 cases, half of which involve questions about employer social media policies. Five of those policies were found to be unlawfully broad, one was lawful, and one was found to be lawful after it was revised.

The remaining cases involved discharges of employees after they posted comments to Facebook. Several discharges were found to be unlawful because they flowed from unlawful policies. But in one case, the discharge was upheld despite an unlawful policy because the employee’s posting was not work-related.

The report underscores two main points made in an earlier compilation of cases:

- Employer policies should not be so sweeping that they prohibit the kinds of activity protected by federal labor law, such as the discussion of wages or working conditions among employees.

- An employee’s comments on social media are generally not protected if they are mere gripes not made in relation to group activity among employees.

Given the new and evolving nature of social media cases, the Acting General Counsel has asked all regional offices to send cases which the Regions believe to be meritorious to the agency’s Division of Advice in Washington D.C., in the interest of tracking them and devising a consistent approach. About 75 cases have been forwarded to the office to date. The report, which does not name the parties to the cases or their locations, illustrates that these cases are extremely fact-specific.

The report represents the Acting General Counsel’s interpretation of the National Labor Relations Act as it applies to forms of communication that did not exist when the Act was written. Three cases involving social media questions are currently pending before the Board and those decisions will give further guidance as the law around social media develops. Information on the three cases can be found on their Case Pages here, here, and here.

Click here for website version

Questions? Contact Us

Workplace Bullying House Bill 1928

2012-01-26T04:58:00.001-08:00

H-1546.1 _____________________________________________
HOUSE BILL 1928
_____________________________________________
State of Washington 62nd Legislature 2011 Regular Session
By Representatives Liias, Kenney, Sells, Moscoso, Ormsby, Van De Wege,
McCoy, Takko, Cody, Green, Blake, Roberts, Rolfes, Hunt, Moeller,
Darneille, Hasegawa, and Stanford
Read first time 02/10/11. Referred to Committee on Judiciary.
1 AN ACT Relating to addressing workplace bullying by making it an
2 unfair practice to subject an employee to an abusive work environment;
3 adding a new section to chapter 49.60 RCW; and creating a new section.
4 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
5 NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. (1) The legislature finds and declares that:
6 (a) The social and economic well-being of the state is dependent
7 upon healthy and productive employees;
8 (b) Surveys and studies have documented that: Approximately one in
9 five employees directly experience health-endangering workplace
10 bullying, abuse, and harassment; and abusive work environments can have
11 serious effects on targeted employees and serious consequences for
12 employers; and
13 (c) Unless mistreated employees have been subjected to abusive
14 treatment at work for unlawful discriminatory reasons, they are
15 unlikely to have legal recourse.
16 (2) For these reasons, the legislature intends:
17 (a) To provide legal recourse for employees who have been harmed,
18 psychologically, physically, or economically, by being deliberately
19 subjected to abusive work environments; and
p. 1 HB 1928
1 (b) To provide legal incentives for employers to prevent and
2 respond to mistreatment of employees at work.
3 NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 49.60 RCW
4 to read as follows:
5 (1) It is an unfair practice to subject an employee to an abusive
6 work environment.
7 (2) It is an affirmative defense to an action for an abusive work
8 environment that:
9 (a) The employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly
10 correct the abusive conduct and the aggrieved employee unreasonably
11 failed to take advantage of appropriate preventive or corrective
12 opportunities provided by the employer. The employer may demonstrate
13 reasonable care by adopting employment policies prohibiting abusive
14 conduct and establishing effective enforcement procedures. This
15 defense is not available when the abusive conduct culminates in a
16 negative employment decision; or
17 (b) The complaint is grounded primarily upon a negative employment
18 decision made consistent with an employer's legitimate business
19 interests, such as a termination or demotion based on an employee's
20 poor performance, or the complaint is grounded primarily upon an
21 employer's reasonable investigation of potentially illegal or unethical
22 activity.
23 (3) For purposes of this section:
24 (a) "Abusive conduct" is conduct of an employer or employee in the
25 workplace, with malice, that a reasonable person would find hostile,
26 offensive, and unrelated to an employer's legitimate business
27 interests. In considering whether abusive conduct is present, a trier
28 of fact should weigh the severity, nature, and frequency of the
29 conduct. Abusive conduct may include, but is not limited to, repeated
30 infliction of verbal abuse such as the use of derogatory remarks,
31 insults, and epithets; verbal or physical conduct that a reasonable
32 person would find threatening, intimidating, or humiliating; or the
33 gratuitous sabotage or undermining of a person's work performance. A
34 single act normally will not constitute abusive conduct, unless
35 especially severe and egregious.
36 (b) "Abusive work environment" is a workplace where an employee is
HB 1928 p. 2
1 subjected to abusive conduct that is so severe that it causes physical
2 or psychological harm to the employee.
3 (c) "Constructive discharge" is abusive conduct: (i) Which causes
4 the employee to resign; (ii) where, prior to resigning, the employee
5 brings to the employer's attention the existence of the abusive
6 conduct; and (iii) which the employer fails to take reasonable steps to
7 eliminate.
8 (d) "Malice" is the desire to see another person suffer
9 psychological, physical, or economic harm, without legitimate cause or
10 justification. Malice may be inferred from the presence of factors
11 such as outward expressions of hostility, harmful conduct inconsistent
12 with an employer's legitimate business interests, a continuation of
13 harmful, illegitimate conduct after the complainant requests that it
14 cease or demonstrates outward signs of emotional or physical distress
15 in the face of the conduct, or attempts to exploit the complainant's
16 known psychological or physical vulnerability.
17 (e) "Negative employment decision" is a termination, constructive
18 discharge, demotion, unfavorable reassignment, refusal to promote, or
19 disciplinary action.
20 (f) "Physical harm" is the material impairment of a person's
21 physical health or bodily integrity, as documented by a competent
22 physician or supported by competent expert evidence at trial.
23 (g) "Psychological harm" is the material impairment of a person's
24 mental health, as documented by a competent psychologist, psychiatrist,
25 or psychotherapist, or supported by competent expert evidence at trial.
--- END ---
p. 3 HB 1928

Railroad Retirement Report

2012-01-26T04:05:00.000-08:00

From the NLD Office

Thanks to Roger Barr (Area 6 Director)

As information only:

National Railroad Retirement Investment Trust

QUARTERLY UPDATE
FOR THE PERIOD ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2011

The National Railroad Retirement Investment Trust (the "Trust") issues a Quarterly Update to provide current information on the Trust’s operations and activities relating to its investment operations. This update reports on the Trust’s activities for the quarter ending December 31, 2011. Copies of the Trust's Annual Management Report and each Quarterly Update are available on the website of the Railroad Retirement Board ("RRB"), http://www.rrb.gov.

As of December 31, 2011, the Trust had received a total of $21.3 billion from the Treasury for investment. Most of this amount was transferred to the Trust periodically during the first six months of its 2003 fiscal year beginning in October 2002. No transfers were received in the fiscal quarter just ended. In the quarter ended December 31, 2011, the Trust continued to transfer monies to the Treasury to help fund benefit payments and administrative expenses of the Railroad Retirement Account (“RRA”). Transfers to the Treasury during the quarter amounted to $274 million. Since the Trust’s inception, it has transferred a total of $11.9 billion to the Treasury.

Investment Objectives

The Trust’s primary investment objectives are to establish a portfolio that will achieve a long- term rate-of-return on assets sufficient to enhance the financial strength of the railroad retirement system and to do so in a diversified manner that minimizes the risk of large losses. Achievement of these objectives will facilitate the payment of benefits by the Railroad Retirement Board and the United States Treasury. To further these objectives the Trust has established an asset allocation policy and will seek to add value by obtaining returns that are in the aggregate greater than the returns of its strategic policy benchmark for this asset allocation. In addition, the Trust takes other appropriate steps to manage investment risk and volatility effectively.

In 2002, the Trust conducted its first comprehensive asset allocation study for the purpose of analyzing alternative asset allocation strategies for the Trust. The study analyzed the long-term expected return, risk, and return correlation of various asset classes, as well as the expected return and risk of various portfolios of these asset classes. In 2004, 2006, 2008, 2009, and 2011 the Trust took steps to review and update its asset allocation. As a result of these reviews, the Trustees have refined periodically the Trust’s asset allocation policy and strategic policy benchmark.

TRUSTEES:
Chair James A. Hixon

Executive Vice President – Law & Corporate Relations

Norfolk Southern Corporation

George J. Francisco, Jr.
National Conference of Firemen &

Oilers - SEIU

William C. Walpert National Secretary Treasurer Brotherhood of Locomotive

Engineers and Trainmen

Joel Parker
Special Assistant to the President & International

Vice President
Transportation Communications International

Union (TCU/IAM)

Richard G. Patsy
Assistant Vice President Pensions and Investments CSX Corporation

William F. Quinn Independent Trustee

C. Alec Vincent
Assistant Vice President Finance &

Treasurer
Burlington Northern Santa Fe, LLC

The Trust's current asset allocation policy and strategic policy benchmark are contained in its Investment Guidelines which are included as Appendix B of the Trust’s Annual Management Report.

The investment performance for the Trust, and the change in market value of Trust-managed and RRB-held assets for the most recent quarter are summarized below.

Investment Performance – Net of Fees for the Quarter ended December 31, 2011
Trust-Managed Assets:	4.29%

Strategic Policy Benchmark:	3.40%

Market Value of Assets (Asset values are in billions of dollars)
Trust-managed assets
As of September 30, 2011	$22.2
As of December 31, 2011	$22.9
Change for quarter ended December 31, 2011	$ 0.7

Trust-managed assets and RRB assets held in reserve
As of September 30, 2011	$23.7
As of December 31, 2011	$24.1
Change for quarter ended December 31, 2011	$ 0.4

As of February 1, 2002 (Trust inception)	$20.7
Transfers to the Treasury	$-11.9
Total change in assets since inception	$15.3
As of December 31, 2011	$24.1

Financial Market Volatility

The Trust originally deployed assets received from Treasury into a diversified and balanced portfolio of US and non-US equity and US fixed income securities. Over time, the Trust has furthered that diversification by allocating a percentage of the portfolio to non-US fixed income securities, private equity, real estate, and commodities. As mandated by its statute, the Trust has avoided undue concentration of investment in any asset class, type of security, or market sector. This policy of broad diversification is intended to serve the Trust well in strong markets and to protect its assets from disproportionate market shocks in volatile periods such as have been experienced in recent years. As part of this diversification process, the Trust holds tens of thousands of different securities selected by its investment managers for its portfolio.

In this volatile investment environment, Trustees and investment staff continue to monitor carefully the Trust’s existing investments, and examine ways to refine its strategies to invest Trust assets in the most effective and prudent manner. The Board of Trustees will continue to manage the assets of the Trust as a patient, long-term investor, recognizing its responsibilities to the railroad retirement system, its workers and retirees. As a long-term investor, the Trust expects to benefit from the long-term recovery of financial markets.

Annual Report

The Trust’s Annual Management Report contains additional information regarding the Trust’s investment activities as well as other financial information. This report can be found on the Railroad Retirement Board’s website at http://www.rrb.gov. ;

BLET General Committee of Adjustment 150

2012-01-25T02:14:00.000-08:00

This rant is for all the brothers and sisters of GCA #150 or the BLET GCA Northlines/MRL

Pretty sad we got this bad on property agreement to begin with, but I will try to hold out hope that brother Wilson can actually negotiate …

I would suggest that the 401K provision be eliminated as when you retire and collect the money that BNSF added to your 401k it is then subtracted from your Retirement annuity when you retire, someone might want to contact the RRB and do some homework? And what about the Vacation schedule (2 weeks after 25 years which was to get the demographics(old guys) to vote in 2010 agreement, as the carriers used the young guys provisions to push their contract through) as this is supposed to be addressed?

Unfortunately with the On property agreements we have, has already wiped out other provisions that were in our favor as you have said yourself the Company benefited from the On property agreements more than us, so with this in mind what leverage do we have? Give up more? With on property agreements what do we need National leaders for? Health and Welfare? Since we bargain at the GCA level does more of our dues go back to the GCA and the Local Level, perhaps what we need more is full time Union paid Local Chairman and paid Vices.

Why do we have the Largest GCA in the BLET with the lackluster results? What do we have in common with areas that the cost of living is far lower than ours? Perhaps we could be better served having our own committee say Washington/Oregon/Idaho/Montana that would have a local General Chairman serving local needs and better energizing our members immediately. It would seem to me that the current status currently seems to benefit a few people more than the whole? The Demographics and the flow of goods are increasing on the West Coast placing us in a better bargaining position but we haven’t been using this to our advantage, I don’t think we are looking for the big pie in the sky, but a fair share, The company has been piling on more and more burden on its employees, and responsibilities.

I would be willing to take a little less if I could get a decent work schedule(lineups), Quits in the yards, Communication, Proactive in fixing hazards, repairing Equipment, Good Working Equipment, Clean on duty locations, Real safety cooperation and programs. I am communicating my concerns and thoughts that could potential strengthen us for the future, If we don’t discuss options we’ll never have the best option or deal.

Robert