N.P. Ry.

The Hardest Years

Part V





August 1, 1934
Saint Paul, Minn.


To Officers and Members
All Lodges, B. of L.F. and E.
Northern Pacific Railway

Dear Sirs and Brothers:

Herewith report of cases handled to a conclusion for period ending July 1, 1934, except such cases as will be necessary to refer for further consideration account of Train Service Board being unable to reach a decision[abridged]:


CLAIM OF ENGINEER PHILLIPS AND FIREMAN KLAMPE, LAKE SUPERIOR DIVISION.
This crew was assigned to yard service at Central Avenue, Superior, and after working 12 hours and 15 minutes, crew was required to bring their engine to Duluth. Claim was presented for a minimum 100 miles for the trip from Central Avenue to Duluth and on account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement with the Company, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: In view of the evidence the Board understands that ruling of 1914 was carried in the Zone Agreement covering the movement of light engines into terminal and that under this ruling one hundred miles was paid if movement for any cause was made after completion of full day's service period in accordance with payment made in 1915 by General Superintendent. Claim is therefore sustained.'' [pp. 3-4]


CLAIM OF FIREMAN JEFFREY, LAKE SUPERIOR DIVISION.
Fireman Jeffrey was called from the extra list at Brainerd to messenger two dead engines in transit from Carlton, Minnesota to Auburn, Washington. Account of engines running hot, they were set out of Train No. 727 at Brainerd, which is not a terminal for the crew handling this train. Claim was presented for continuous time while at Brainerd and on account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement with the Company, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:
''DECISION: The Board decides that due to Brainerd not being a terminal for the crew handling this dead engine, the dispute be disposed of on the practice under Rule 102 (b).'' [p. 3]


CLAIM OF FIREMAN ROBINSON, ST. PAUL DIVISION (EAST).
Fireman Robinson was called from the extra board at St. Paul for Engine 1162, which was being sent light from St. Paul to Stillwater for yard service at that point. On arrival at Stillwater, this fireman was instructed to act as messenger on dead engine 1167 Stillwater to St. Paul. Claim was made for a minimum day as fireman on 1162 and 18 hours for messenger service Stillwater to St. Paul instead of continuous time payment as allowed. Claim has been sustained in accordance with decision of Western Train Service Board covering a similar case from the Montana Seniority District. [p. 5]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER WILDES AND FIREMAN AHERN, ST. PAUL DIVISION (EAST).
This crew was assigned to chain gang service and were used to assist a yard crew by being required to couple up the head end of the train, pump off the air and shove the train back so as to hold an additional 16 cars to be added to the train. Claim was made for terminal switching and on account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement with the Company, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: Claim denied.'' [p. 5]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER GRAVES AND FIREMAN, FARGO DIVISION (EAST).
This crew was occupying a combination assignment at Valley City governed by the provisions of Rule 42. Only July 30, this crew went on duty at 6:15 A.M. and started trip from Valley City to Berea at 1:50 P.M. Account of stalling on hill, it was necessary to take train into Valley City, departing again at 3:20 P.M. On August 1, this crew came on duty at 6:15 A.M. and started trip from Valley City to Berea at 2:00 P.M. Account of stalling on hill it was necessary to back train into Valley City, again departing at 3:05 P.M. Claim was presented for an additional 100 miles on the above dates, account of leaving Valley City after eight hours from time required to come on duty. On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement with the Management, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: Claim sustained.'' [p. 7]


CLAIM OF FIREMEN JUETTE, SCHEITLIN, STEIFVATER AND CHOUINARD, YELLOWSTONE DIVISION.
These firemen were assigned to the extra board and presented payment account of using roundhouse employees in grinding down tires on roundhouse tracks at Glendive, it being the contention of the Committee that this service is ordinarily performed by hostlers in connection with their other duties. Account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement with the Management, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: In view of the conflicting evidence submitted in this case the Board decides that the respective parties shall develop the general practice in effect and dispose of these claims accordingly.'' [p. 9]


CLAIM THAT HOSTLING POSITIONS AT DICKINSON SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DISCONTINUED APRIL 9, 1930.
After the assignment of an additional hostler at Dickinson under decision of the Train Service Board, the position of night fireman was discontinued and hostlers were required to take care of the engineman's board and supervise the care of engines and roundhouse employees at that point. Later on the Company made a check of hostling service at Dickinson, resulting in the pulling off the hostlers at that point, on the grounds that less than 25 percent of the eight hour period was consumed in hostling service. It was the contention of the Committee that in making check of hostling service, consideration had not been given to the fact that these hostlers were responsible for the care of engines during the period the were acting as roundhouse foreman. On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement with the Management, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: In view of the evidence presented in this case the contention of the employees is denied.'' [p. 11]


CLAIM OF FIREMEN, ROCKY MOUNTAIN DIVISION (EAST).
Account of discontinuing switch tenders in Livingston yard, instructions were issued that firemen on all light engine in and out of Livingston would be required to handle their own switches. On account of the past practice existing at this point, request was presented that firemen on light engines be relieved of this service. On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement with the Management, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: Rule 85 is clear so far as applying to engines going to and from roundhouse and train, but it is not clear so far as applying to light engine movements not in connection with train movement; therefore, the Board decides that the general application of the rule to light engine movements should be applied in this case.'' [p. 11]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER O'NEILL AND FIREMAN MONAHAN, ROCKY MOUNTAIN DIVISION (EAST).
This crew was assigned to chain gang service when extra crew arriving at Helena on light engine No. 2119 was used to handle through freight extra Helena to Livingston. Claim was made for run-around payment, and on account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement with the Management, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: The Board decides that if extra crew have not been injected into chain gang service at the away from home terminal as in this case under general application of the rules, claim is sustained, otherwise denied.'' [p. 12]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER YOUNG AND FIREMAN, ROCKY MOUNTAIN DIVISION (EAST).
This crew was assigned to helper service and after assisting train to summit of the grade, crew continued light for distance of 15.8 miles, for the purpose of filling cisterns, the entire service being performed within the limits of the helper district. Claim was presented for an additional 100 miles account of being used in other than mountain helper service, not in connection with trip as mountain helper. On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement with the Management, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: In the opinion of the Board the movement of this engine from Homestake to Pipestone and Spire Rock for the especial purpose of filling water barrels as in this case cannot properly be considered as helper service; therefor, this claim is sustained.'' [p. 14]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER RASKOB AND FIREMAN HEYER, ROCKY MOUNTAIN DIVISION (WEST).
This crew was called from the extra board at Missoula and deadheaded to Wallace to handle Engine 3005 Wallace to Missoula. Leaving Wallace, this crew was required to assist Train No. 842 account of having more tonnage than the road engine and regular helper could handle. Claim was made for 112 miles helper service and 102 miles for mileage outside the helper territory. On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: The Board decides that this claim should be disposed of on basis of payments made n the past in cases involving similar principle.'' [p. 16]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER McKAY AND FIREMAN REGAN, ROCKY MOUNTAIN DIVISION (WEST).
This crew was called at Wallace for rotary snow plow and on arrival at Lookout, returned light to Dorsey to assist Train No. 842 Dorsey to Lookout, where then used to push rotary snow plow Lookout to Saltese ahead of Train No. 842. Claim was presented for 112 miles assisting Train 842 and 124 miles with four hours and ten minutes overtime performing rotary snow plow service. On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: In view of the facts and circumstances claim is sustained.'' [pp. 16-17]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER WARDLE AND FIREMAN ODION, ROCKY MOUNTAIN DIVISION (WEST).
This crew was assigned to mountain helper service between Helena and Blossburg. After helping passenger Train No. 3, Helena to Blossburg, this crew was engaged from 10:40 A.M. until 6:25 P.M. furnishing steam for section men thawing ice in Mullen Tunnel, then returned with engine light to Helena. Claim was submitted for 100 miles plus 12 constructive miles for helper service and in addition thereto, a minimum of 100 miles under Rule 35 (c) for service in the Mullen Tunnel. This crew was also used for similar service on two additional dates. On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement with the Management, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: In vie of evidence involved in this case the claim is sustained without prejudice to rules involved.'' [p. 17]


CLAIM OF FIREMAN STAEHELI, IDAHO DIVISION (EAST).
This fireman was first out on the extra board at Yardley when crew assigned to Trains 865 and 866 were called 11 hours in advance of their carded leaving time, in order to provide empties for stock loading at Athol, an intermediate point, this crew performing their regular way freight work to Hope, their terminal. Claim was submitted for run-around payment on the basis that the work properly belonged to extra men at Yardley. Account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: Claim denied.'' [p. 18]


CLAIM OF FIREMEN, IDAHO DIVISION (EAST).
Train 661 operates between Yardley and Lewiston, 149.3 miles, scheduled to leave Yardley at 6:00 P.M. and arrive at Lewiston at 4:05 A.M. Pullman is an intermediate point 88.1 miles from Yardley and Train 661 is scheduled to arrive at Pullman at 11:45 P.M., this has been the regular eating point for engine crews on this assignment. On account of heavy business, Train 661 would ordinarily arrive at Pullman from eight to ten hours after crew was required to come on duty at Yardley and request was made that an eating point be established for firemen in accordance with the provisions of Rule 87. On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: The Board sustains the contention of the employees that Rule 87 be complied with.'' [p. 18]


CLAIM OF FIREMEN DOUVILLE, WELCH, BAKER AND McDOUGALL, IDAHO DIVISION (EAST).
Stoker fired engines are operated in freight service between Yardley and Paradise, distance 183.9 miles under special agreement providing that where hand fired engines are used in freight service, the provisions of Rule 83 (b), Firemen's Schedule would be observed and the men would not be required to exceed the 175 mile limit. The claims of the above firemen cover cases where firemen were used on hand fired engines between Paradise and Yardley and no relief firemen were furnished, claim being presented for an additional 100 miles account of these firemen being required to perform the service of relief firemen after having reached the limit of 175 miles. On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: The Board decides that Rule 83 (b) was violated and these claims be settled accordingly.'' [p. 19]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER JOHN HART AND FIREMAN, ENGINEER WILSON AND FIREMAN, AND ENGINEER WILKINS AND FIREMAN, IDAHO DIVISION (EAST). Since October 1925, freight engines have been operated between Missoula and Yardley through Paradise, the division terminal. Paradise was discontinued as an engine terminal in November 1927, and the service of hostlers discontinued at this point. These claims cover various instances where the engine crew has been required to perform hostling service on roundhouse tracks at Paradise, either in supplying engines or chain engines at this point. Claim was presented for a minimum hostler's day in accordance with the provisions of Rule 59 (a) Fireman's Schedule. On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: The Board is unable to reach a decision, therefore, both parties are so notified and this case is closed on the Board's docket.'' [pp. 19-20]


CLAIM OF HOSTLER WODELMAN AND HOSTLER HELPER CHRISTIANSON, IDAHO DIVISION (EAST).
This hostler and hostler helper employed at Parkwater roundhouse were required to switch out the steam derrick and re-rail a car on the coal dock track, this move being made within the limits of the inside hostling district. The work consumed one hour and was performed during the eight hour period. Claim was made by this hostler of one day as an engineer at work train rate and by the hostler helper for one day as fireman at work train rate in addition to regular pay as hostler and hostler helper. On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: In view of the facts and circumstances claim is denied.'' [p. 20]


CLAIM OF FIREMAN KIRKHAM, IDAHO DIVISION (WEST).
Fireman Kirkham was called for messenger service at Ellensburg to messenger a dead engine Ellensburg to Auburn. On arrival at Lester, he was tied up on account of washout trouble and time deducted. Claim was presented for continuous time payment from time of leaving Ellensburg until arrival at Auburn, account of Lester not being a terminal for train in which dead engine was being moved. Account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: The Board decides that due to Lester not being a terminal for the crew handling this dead engine the dispute to be disposed of on the practice under Rule 102 (b).'' [p. 21]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER HEINZER AND FIREMAN GRIFFITH, IDAHO DIVISION (WEST).
This crew was assigned to mixed run out of Walla Walla and prior to leaving on the initial trip, due to standpipe being out of order, they were required to take the engine to the Union Pacific yard at Walla Walla for a tank of water. Claim was presented for an additional 100 miles for the move to the Union Pacific yard for water. Account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement, this case was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: In view of the facts and circumstances in this particular case the claim is denied.'' [p. 23]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER NYSTRAND, TACOMA DIVISION (EAST).
Engineer Nystrand was the senior available demoted engineer at Lester when a regularly assigned helper engineer was used for extra work when the extra list at that point was exhausted, and claim was presented for run-around payment under Rule 121 (c), Engineer's Schedule. In handling this case, it developed that it has been the practice at Lester when the extra list is exhausted, to send to Auburn for an extra engineer instead of using the senior available demoted engineer at Lester. When there is not sufficient time to get an extra man from Auburn, it has been the practice to use one of the regular helper engineers at Lester for extra work. It was believed to be of greater advantage to the men to maintain the past practice of using extra men from the Auburn board when the extra board at Lester is exhausted, instead of maintaining that the senior available demoted engineer at Lester should be used in cases of this kind, although, the Company was agreeable to changing the past practice in this respect. Accordingly, the claim for this run-around payment has been withdrawn.'' [p. 24]


CLAIM OF ENGINEERS AND FIREMEN, TACOMA DIVISION (EAST).
Notice was posted at Cle Elum discontinued the past practice of calling crews for service with home terminal at that point. It was the contention of the Committee that this notice was in violation of Rule 67 and on account of being unable to reach a satisfaction settlement, this case was referred to the Train Service Board and the following decision rendered:
''DECISION: The Board decides that the bulletin in question is not in violation of Rule 67, but is of the opinion that this controversy can be disposed of by negotiation to equitably care for the conditions at this point.'' [p. 25]


CLAIM CONCERNING REMOVAL OF HOSTLER AT CENTRALIA, TACOMA DIVISION (WEST).
The Company discontinued one hostling position at Centralia and reassigned the two remaining hostlers to cover one assignment from 3:00 P.M. to 11:00 P.M. and the other from 4:30 A.M. to 12:30 P.M., hostling service being performed by roundhouse foremen during the period the two hostlers were not on duty. It was the contention of the Committee that at the time this hostler was removed, each of the three hostlers were engaged in hostling service more than 25 percent of their assignment and that it was not permissible under the 25 percent rule to take the period from 12:30 P.M. to 3:00 P.M. and from 11:00 P.M. to 4:30 A.M. in order to provide eight hours within the 24 hours period within which loss than 25 percent of the time was consumed in hostling service. Account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement, this claim was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision has been rendered:

''DECISION: The Board is unable to reach a decision; therefore, both parties are so notified and this case is closed on the Board's docket.'' [pp. 26-26]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER PECK AND FIREMAN HUNTER, TACOMA DIVISION (WEST).
This crew was called from the extra board to deadhead to Shelton, distance by rail 96.8 miles, to perform switching at that point. Account of no Sunday train service, crew was deadheaded by automobile and were allowed minimum passenger rate in accordance with the rail mileage. Claim was presented for local freight rate for deadhead trip, based on the fact that if deadheaded by rail, crew would be required to deadhead a part of distance on local freight train. Settlement of this case has been reached on the basis of allowing the rate of firemen firing the trains that crew would have been deadheaded on by rail between Tacoma and Shelton. [p. 27]


CLAIM OF ENGINEER GILMAN AND FIREMAN, TACOMA DIVISION (WEST). This crew was called from the Tacoma extra board and run caboose-hop to Orting and return to pick up 87 cars of logs, which were moved to Tacoma. Claim was made for local freight rate and pay under Rule 29 (c). On account of being unable to reach a satisfactory settlement, this claim was referred to the Western Train Service Board and the following decision was rendered:

''DECISION: If this crew was taking the place of regularly assigned logging crew on this trip claim is sustained; otherwise denied.'' [p. 28]


SETTLEMENT OF DEADLOCKED CASES.
It will be noted that a number of cases have been referred back to the Management and Committee with no decision having been rendered by the Western Train Service Board, account of the members of the Board being unable to reach a decision. This would indicate a deadlock between the representatives of the railroads and the representatives of the organizations comprising the Board.
Under the Railway Labor Act as amended by the 73rd Congress and approved by the President on June 21, 1934, provision is made to avoid a deadlock on the Board through the selection of a neutral person to be known as referee to sit with the Board and make an award in cases where the Board is unable to secure a majority vote to make a decision. It is my understanding that cases that have been deadlocked under the present Board may be referred to this new Board for hearing and decision, and this is the procedure contemplated at this time. [p. 29]

Respectfully submitted
T.P. Gorman
General Chairman, B. of L.F. and E.
Northern Pacific Railway


SOURCE:
Correspondence: Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen Green River Lodge No. 895 Collection, White River Valley Museum, Auburn, Washington.



Author: John A. Phillips, III. Title: The Hardest Years, Part V. URL: www.employees.org/~davison/nprha/blfefive.html.

© August 21, 2000

BACK