AGREEMENT
For Protection of Employees
Represented By The
BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS
In Event of Approval of
Merger and Related Applications
Filed By
BURLINGTON NORTHERN INC.1
(formerly Great Northern Pacific & Burlington Lines, Inc.)
And Other Carriers
In
I.C.C. Finance Dockets Nos. 21478, 21479 and 21480

WHEREAS, a joint application has been filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission (herein called the Commission) in Finance Dockets Nos. 21478, 21479 and 21480 by the Great Northern Pacific & Burlington Lines, Inc., Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company, Great Northern Railway Company, Northern Pacific Railway Company, and Spokane, Portland and Seattle Railway Company (herein called the Carriers) for authority under the Interstate Commerce Act (herein called the Act) as follows:

1. Under Section 5(2): (a) Great Northern Pacific & Burlington (the New Company), Great Northern, Northern Pacific and Pacific Coast to merge properties and franchises of Great Northern, Northern Pacific and Pacific Coast into the New Company; (b) the New Company and Chicago, Burlington & Quincy to merge thereafter properties and franchises of Burlington into the New Company; (c) the New Company for an order to authorize it to lease all of the properties and assets of the Spokane, Portland and Seattle Railway Company for a term of ten years; (d) the New Company to acquire sole or joint control, as the case may be, of carriers subsidiary to or affiliated with the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy, Great Northern, Northern Pacific and Spokane, Portland and Seattle; and (e) the New Company for an order authorizing it to acquire rights held by the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy, Great Northern, Northern Pacific, Pacific Coast and Spokane, Portland and Seattle for use of certain trackage of other railroads. 

¹ Corporate name changed from “Great Northern Pacific and Burlington Lines, Inc.” to “Burlington Northern Inc.” March 2, 1970.

² Under Section 20(a) of the Act: the New Company and the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy to consummate the issuance and sale and pledging of certain corporate capital stock and bonds, all as set out in the aforesaid joint application of the Carriers, and

³ Under Sections 1(18) to 1(20) of the Act: for a certificate or certificates that the present or future public convenience and necessity require the extensions and abandonments of lines of railroad referred to in Parts III and IV of the aforesaid joint application.

NOTE: These transactions collectively are referred to as the “Great Northern Pacific & Burlington Lines Merger.”

AND WHEREAS, Section 5(2) (f) of the Act (49 U.S.C.A. #5(2) (f)) provides in part:

"Nothwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter and chapters 8 and 12 of this title, an agreement pertaining to the protection of the interests of said employees may hereafter be entered into by any carrier or carriers by railroad and the duly authorized representative or representatives of its or their employees."

AND WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, and in accordance with that part of Section 5(2) (f) of the Act above quoted, the parties signatory hereto have reached agreement respecting the protection to be afforded the employees represented by the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers.

IT IS AGREED

Section 1

(a) The provisions of this Agreement and the provisions of all implementing agreements in relation thereto shall apply in the event the Commission shall approve the applications in Finance Dockets 21478, 21479 and 21480, PROVIDED that this Agreement for employee protection shall be null and void and of no force and effect unless within 120 days from date of receipt of material required by subparagraph (b) of this Section the parties shall have entered into an agreement pursuant to Section 8 hereof, covering the general implementation of guidelines governing the following:

i. The consolidation and extension of Great Northern, Northern Pacific and Spokane, Portland and Seattle engineers’ seniority rosters and seniority districts on an equitable basis and an allocation of work on rerouted traffic with provision for Chicago, Burlington & Quincy engineers to participate in the work at consolidated facilities of the New Company at Minneapolis—St. Paul, Minnesota, and Sioux City, Iowa, and elimination of any existing agreement provisions which are not consistent therewith.

ii. The consolidation of present terminals and terminal facilities, and switching limits at the following locations:

 

a. Portland, Oregon, and Vancouver, Washington
b. Seattle, Washington
c. Everett, Washington
d. Tacoma, Washington
e. Spokane, Washington
f. Butte, Montana
g. Helena, Montana
h. Grand Forks, North Dakota—East Grand Forks, Minnesota
i. Fargo-West Fargo, North Dakota, and Moorhead and Dilworth, Minnesota
j. Minneapolis—St. Paul— Daytons Bluff—Northtown, Minnesota
k. Duluth, Minnesota, and Superior—Allouez—East End, Wisconsin

iii. The extension of switching limits at the following locations:

a. Seattle, Washington
b. Spokane, Washington.

a. Bellingham, Washington
b. Crookston, Minnesota
c. Wahpeton, North Dakota, and Breckenridge, Minnesota
d. St. Cloud, Minnesota.

(b) The Carriers shall promptly furnish the representatives of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers all requested statistical information such as car miles, train miles and yard engine hours which is necessary for the preparation of consolidated engineers’ seniority rosters on an equitable basis.

(c) It is further understood and agreed if this Agreement shall become null and void in accordance with the provisions of subparagraph (a) above, the employees described herein will be entitled to the protection provided by the I.C.C. in its approval of the Great Northern Pacific & Burlington Lines merger.

Section 2

(a) The scope and purposes of this Agreement are:

i. To assure employment and/or earnings, as hereinafter prescribed, to defined employees involved in the Great Northern Pacific & Burlington Lines merger,

ii. To expedite the changes in services, facilities and operations involved in the Great Northern Pacific & Burlington Lines merger, and

iii. To prescribe the procedures by which existing agreements between the parties shall be modified and consolidated to conform with the changes in service, facilities and operations involved in the Great Northern Pacific & Burlington Lines merger.

(b) The New Company will take over and assume all contracts, schedules and agreements between Great Northern, Northern Pacific, Chicago, Burlington & Quincy and Spokane, Portland and Seattle, respectively, and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers concerning rates of pay, rules, working conditions and fringe benefits in effect on the final effective date of the Commission Order covering the Great Northern Pacific & Burlington Lines merger and will be bound by the terms and provisions thereof in the same manner and to the same extent as if the New Company had been a party thereto, subject to changes made in accordance with the provisions of the Railway Labor Act, and subject to Section 7 of this Agreement.

(c) The New Company will take into its employment all locomotive engineer employees (including all employees having seniority and equities as such) of Great Northern, Northern Pacific, Chicago, Burlington & Quincy and Spokane, Portland and Seattle as of the date of this Agreement or subsequent thereto up to and including the final effective date of the Commission Order, and none of these protected employees of the said Carriers shall be deprived of their employment status or placed in a worse position with respect to compensation, rules governing working conditions, fringe benefits or rights and privileges pertaining thereto at any time during such employment.

For the purpose of this Agreement the term “protected employees” means all engine service employees of the Carriers having engineer’s seniority, or being eligible for promotion to engineers and who render any compensated service between the date of this Agreement and the final effective date of the Order of the Commission, both dates inclusive.

Employees who perform no service between the date of this Agreement and the final effective date of the Commission Order account of illness, injury or dismissal, but resume service subsequent to the final effective date of such Order, shall thereafter be considered “protected employees” in the application of this paragraph (c), provided, if not so situated during the period above mentioned their seniority would have permitted them to perform compensated service.

(d) The New Company shall also take over, assume and continue the employment relationship of all locomotive engineers on furlough or leave of absence and preserve their rights and equities in accordance with schedules and agreements between the Carriers and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, subject to Section 7 of this Agreement.

(e) The Carriers agree to furnish Seniority District rosters (which shall be attached as Appendix “B” to this agreement) of all locomotive engineers entitled to preservation of employment, compensation, and fringe benefits, and also indicating all employees on furlough or leave of absence, each of which rosters shall also set forth the Carrier by which the employees are employed. The Carriers further agree that the said rosters are subject to revision as necessary to include any employees to be added or deleted from said rosters between the date of this Agreement and the final effective date of the Commission Order.

Section 3

(a) An employee shall not be regarded as deprived of his employment status or placed in a worse position with respect to his compensation, rules governing working conditions, fringe benefits, or rights and privileges pertaining thereto, in case of his resignation, death, retirement or, as a result of any temporary absence in case of suspension or dismissal for cause in accordance with existing agreements, or failure to work due to disability or discipline, subject to provisions of Section 2(c) of this Agreement, upon return to service, or failure to accept a position available to him in a consolidated seniority district as prescribed by an implementing agreement.

(b) Each “protected employee” shall receive a monthly allowance determined by computing the total compensation received by the employee and his total hours worked during the last twelve (12) months in which he performed service immediately preceding* January 1, 1968 (such twelve (12) months being hereinafter referred to as the “test period”) and by dividing separately the total compensation and the total hours and/or miles worked by twelve, thereby producing the average monthly compensation and average monthly hours and/or miles worked, which shall be the minimum amounts used to guarantee the “protected employee”, and if his compensation is less in any month in which he performs railroad service than the aforesaid average compensation he shall be paid the difference, less compensation for any time lost on account of voluntary absences to the extent that he is not available for service equivalent to his average monthly hours worked during the test period and less any compensation lost on account of a failure to exercise seniority to available service producing greater compensation in the same class and in the same terminal or district where employed, but he shall be compensated in addition thereto at the rate of the position filled for any time worked in excess of the average monthly hours worked during the test period. For adjustment of compensation due any employee account of time lost on voluntary absences a monthly average hourly rate to be deducted shall be computed as follows: Test period average monthly earnings to be divided by average monthly hours (miles converted to hours) worked establishing the average hourly rate.

*(c) In the determination of the amounts to be credited against an extra or unassigned engineer (including period of displacement in moving from one job to another), the Carrier will deduct from such employee’s average test period compensation and average time paid for, for each 24 hour period or portion thereof, beginning with the time he lays off or is entitled to displacement rights, compensation equal to 1 .2 days at the basic rate of the service last performed and 9 hours average time paid for, providing such employee has not performed compensated service equivalent to his “average time paid for” during the test period. 

*(d) When an employee is voluntarily absent from duty during an entire calendar month, he will not be entitled to any compensation under the provisions of this Agreement.

(e) The New Company will promptly establish the “monthly allowance” for each “protected employee” as set forth in paragraph (b) above, and such allowance will always remain a “protected employee’s”

*NOTE: Origin — 4/10/70 Agreement.

guarantee except that the percentage of future general wage increases will be added to the said “monthly allowance” beginning with the date in the month in which such wage increase becomes effective.

(f) In determining the “average monthly compensation” provided for in this Section, any month in which an employee involved was on bona fide furlough for the entire month but performed emergency service for which he did not stand to be called under the rules of the working agreement applicable to the craft or class in which he held seniority, such month would not be used as one of the months in such “test period”.

(g) Any compensation whatsoever (including vacation pay, arbitraries, pay for time lost, etc.) received from the New Company, but excluding payments made on account of personal injuries to whatever extent such payments are for reasons other than time lost, shall be used to reduce the amount of allowances due any employee under this Section.

(h) The foregoing does not relieve employees of handling and processing claims on and in accordance with Appendix “C” attached hereto; nor does it deprive the New Company of any defense against such claims which is available to it under Section 3 of this Agreement.

*(j) In determining compensation earned in a current month for purpose of determining if any adjustment is due toward “monthly allowance” under Section 3(b) in territory where the work week of locomotive engineers in yard service has been reduced in accordance with the election provided in Article 3 of Agreement “A” of the National Agreement of May 23, 1952, as amended, it is understood that the Carrier may apply a work week transition factor by adding an amount equal to the difference between the current comparable yard engineers’ seven day yard rate and such rate multiplied by 1.15 to the compensation actually paid for each tour of duty performed by a locomotive engineer in yard service, except that such transition factor will not be applied in the following circumstances:

(1) When 50% or more of the tours of duty used in determining the locomotive engineer’s “average monthly compensation” in the test period were in five day per week yard service established by National rule, schedule rule or practice on the property on which employed, or

(2) When the locomotive engineer is a member of an engineers’ extra list and 50% or more of the assignments protected by him in the calendar month of claim are compensated at the road rate of pay, or

(3) When 50% or more of the tours of duty used in determining the locomotive engineer’s “average monthly compensation” in the test period were paid at a road rate of pay and such engineer is unable to obtain a position other than a five day per week yard engineers’ assignment, or

(4) When 50% or more of the tours of duty used in determining the employee’s “average monthly compensation” in the test period was earned in service subject to the scope of a schedule agreement under which the Five Day Work Week was effective, or

(5) When in a current work week the engineer is scheduled or required to work six (6) or seven (7) days in yard service under applicable rule or agreement.

*NOTE: Origin — 4/10/70 Agreement.

Question 1: How were the hours worked in test period determined?

Answer: By converting total miles paid for to equivalent hours.

Question 2: Will the same method be used in computing hours worked in a current month for purpose of determining guarantee payments, if any?

Answer: Yes.

Question 3: Is it intended that the terms “hours and/or mileage equivalent” be based on 100 miles equivalent to 8 hours in freight or yard service and 100 miles equivalent to 5 hours in passenger service?

Answer: Yes, calculated as follows:

Hours X l00 mileage, freight — yard, and
8

Hours X l00 miles, passenger. 5

i.e. — Engineer A-
200 hrs. X 100=25 00 frt. or yd. miles.
  8

200 hrs. X 100=4 000 passenger miles, or

2500 miles X 8=200 hrs.
 100

4000 miles X 5 =200 hrs.
 100

NOTE: One hour overtime in road freight or yard service will be computed on the basis of 18.75 miles or 1½ hours in determining the base period and computing the protection allowance.

Question 4: Will the total miles paid for or the total miles worked be used in computing the hourly factor?

Answer: Total miles paid for converted to straight time hours.

Question 5: An engineer’s average monthly hours are 200 during test period, which was determined by dividing total miles paid for by 12½. He works 160 hours straight time and 26 hours and 40 minutes overtime. Would this be equivalent to the test period hours

Answer: Yes.

Question 6: Average monthly hours are “160” during test period. Engineer H now bids in a job that works 15 hours per day, or equivalent to 92½ straight time hours in a 5-day week. He signs up on the “Hog Book” to work rest days and works first two rest days 15 hours each at time and one-half or equivalent to 45 straight time hours then works first two 15-hour days of his next regular work week equivalent to 37 straight time hours. He now has total of 174.5 straight time hours worked for the month. Can he lay off the 20 remainder days of the month without any offset against his guarantee?

Answer: Yes.

Question 7A: Engineer A is senior to Engineers B and C and his test period monthly components are as follows:

Monthly earnings average                                $600.00
Monthly hours average                                     200 hrs.
Monthly 2500 miles converted to hours            200 hrs.
Monthly average hourly rate                                $3.00
Selected Zone                                      Fargo-Dilworth

Engineer B is junior to Engineer A but senior to Engineer C and their respective monthly components are as follows:

B monthly earnings average                                  $550.00
Monthly miles converted to hours (2375 miles)     190 Hrs.
Monthly average hourly rate                                     $2.89
Selected Zone                                           Fargo-Dilworth
C monthly earnings average                                  $590.00
Monthly hours average                                        197 Hrs.
Monthly miles converted to hours (2463 miles)     197 Hrs.
Monthly average hourly rate                                      $2.99
Selected Zone                                                          Minot

Engineer A was available for service the entire month and worked 210 hours or the mileage equivalent thereof and earned $654.00. What compensation would be due Engineer A?

Answer: $654.00

Question 7B: Engineer A was available for service the entire month and worked 190 hours or the mileage equivalent thereof and earned $575.00. What compensation would be due Engineer A?

Answer: $575.00 plus $25.00, or $600.00, the amount of his monthly earnings guarantee.

Question 7C: Engineer A, assigned to yard engine No. 15, marked off two (2) days during the month and worked 190 hours and earned $575.00. What compensation is due Engineer A?

Answer: He is only due $575.00, as he was not available for service equivalent to his base period of 200 hours; hence, 200 hours minus 190 hours equals 10; 10 hours times his $3.00 monthly average hourly rate equals $30.00, which amount is deductible from the $600.00 monthly guarantee.

Question 7D: Using the same factors as set forth in Question No. 7C, except Engineer A worked 195 hours. What compensation would be due?

Answer: $575.00 plus $10.00, or $585.00 calculated as follows: $575.00 plus $25.00 minus $15.00 (200 hours minus 195 hours equals 8 hours times $3.00 equals $15.00 to be deducted).

Question 7E: Engineer A assigned to yard engine No. 15 marked off two (2) days during the month and worked 170 hours and earned $565.00. What compensation is due?

Answer: $565.00 calculated as follows: 16 hours (hours assignment No. 15 worked on the two off days) times $3.00 equals $48.00. $600.00 minus $48.00 equals $552.00.

Question 7F: Engineer A assigned to train No. 66 was available for service the entire month and worked 2400 miles or 192 hours, the equivalent thereof, and earned $575.00. What compensation is due?

Answer: $575.00 plus $25.00 equals $600.00, his monthly guarantee.

Question 7G: Engineer A is assigned to tram No. 66 and marked off one (1) trip (350 miles) and worked 2200 miles and earned $550.00. What compensation is due?

Answer: $550.00, by reason of the following: 2500 miles minus 2200 miles equals 300 miles. (200 hrs.) minus (176 hrs.) equals 24 hours. 24 hours (300 miles) times $3.00 equals $72.00; $600.00 minus $72.00 equals $528.00. The earnings were in excess of monthly guarantee less deductible compensation for time lost on account of the voluntary absence to the extent of the average monthly hours and/or miles worked.

Question 7H: Engineer A is assigned to the extra board during the month of July and marks off for 26 hours July 10, starting at 7:00 a.m., and 10 hours July 20, starting at 3:00 p.m. His turn on the extra board is not called during either period Engineer A is off. What deduction, if any, would be charged against Engineer A’s monthly guarantee?

Answer: For each 24-hour period or portion thereof, 1.2 days at basic rate of last service performed would be charged against Engineer A’s guarantee for the month and 9 hours credited to his monthly hours worked. In this instance, Engineer A’s guarantee would be reduced by 3.6 days at the basic rate of last service performed, and 27 hours credited to his monthly hours worked.

Question 7I: Engineer A is assigned to the extra board and during the month he marks off for 5 hours in one 24-hour period during which time his turn is called and makes 350 miles. What deduction, if any, should be charged against Engineer A’s guarantee?

Answer: Engineer A’s guarantee would be charged with the loss of 1.2 days at the basic rate of last service performed and 9 hours credited to monthly hours worked.

Question 7J: Engineer A is assigned to the extra board and marks off at 10:00 a.m., July 10 for two 24-hour periods. During this time he is displaced or his turn is cut from the board as a result of mileage regulations. What deduction, if any, should be made from Engineer A’s guarantee after displacement from the board?

Answer: Engineer A’s guarantee should be charged with the loss of 1.2 days and credited 9 hours for each 24-hour period or portion thereof, lost subsequent to his displacement (the same principle would be applied to a regularly assigned man who was displaced from his assignment for any reason while he is marked off up to time he exercises seniority).

Question 7K: Engineer A has a guarantee of $600.00 per month arrived at by working an average of 200 hours per month at an average rate of $3.00 per hour (as shown on his present guarantee card). During the month he met all the qualifications of the agreements for his guarantee; however, during the month he worked 200 hours and earned $550.00. What compensation is he entitled to receive?

Answer: $600.00, his guarantee.

Question 7L: Using the same example set forth in Question 7K above, Engineer A worked 220 hours and earned $650.00, for the month. However, for the first 200 hours of service his earnings were $590.00. Is any adjustment due account of his earnings per hour being lower than his test period (as subsequently adjusted by increases as provided in Section 3(e)) hourly rate?

Answer: Yes, he is to receive no less than his base guarantee. He is due $600.00 for his first 200 hours, plus pay for his hours over his base (200) hours at the prevailing rate of pay for the service performed beyond his base period hours, or adjustment of $10.00. 

Question 7M: Using the same facts as set forth in Question 7K above, Engineer A worked his test period hours (200), but was marked off for a couple of days. May the Superintendent make deductions for the days Engineer A was off?

Answer: No deductions would be made as Engineer A worked his average monthly hours during the month.

Question 7N: Engineer A lays off two consecutive days during a month. On the first day he lays off his assignment is worked by another engineer; on the second day his assignment does not work. Is the engineer’s allowance due him reduced only one day that his assignment actually worked and was filled by another engineer?

Answer: Yes, provided Engineer A had not equaled or exceeded his average monthly hours.

Question 7-O: Engineer A worked during his test period in the freight pool at terminal (X) with the test period earnings of $950.00.

Engineer 13 worked during test period six months in freight pool service and six months in yard service at terminal (X) with test period earnings of $950.00.

Engineer A’s seniority would permit him to remain in freight pool service at terminal (X) but he elects to work a yard engine, and his earnings on this yard engine are $800.00, with difference of $150.00 between what he earned and amount of his test period earnings.

Is the $150.00 reduced; If so, what amount is it reduced?

Answer: Yes, to the extent of the earnings of a junior engineer in the pool on a one-for-one basis.

Question 7P: Engineer B’s seniority permits him to hold a regular pool turn but he places on yard engine and his earnings are $800.00, a difference of $150.00 in his earnings and amount of test period guarantee. Is the $150.00 reduced? If so, what amount is it reduced?

Answer: Yes, to the extent of the earnings of a junior engineer in the pool or yard service on a one-for-one basis at terminal (X).

Question 7Q: Engineer A is restricted to a yard engine or branch line service for cause—rule violation, physical condition—after test period. Is the amount due under test period guarantee reduced account of such restriction?

Answer: Yes, by giving him a temporary guarantee during such period of restriction based on average earnings of all assignments to which restricted and which he can hold.

Question 7R: Engineer A during his test period was demoted and working as a fireman. Under Section 3 (e) does his test period guarantee remain the same?

Answer: Yes, subject to subsequent general wage adjustments.

Question 8: In closed yard where engineers’ seniority is confined to yard service only, yard engineers work 6 or 7 days a week. Subsequent to December 31, 1967 a 5-day yard agreement is adopted; all yard engines work 5 days paying 5-day rate. Engineer D’s test period earnings are $750.00. Working S days a week and he does not lay off, his earnings in a given month are $600.00, a difference of $150.00 in his earnings and amount of test period guarantee. Is the $150.00 reduced? If so, what amount is it reduced?

Answer: Yes, subject to Item 3 of Memorandum of Agreement of April 10, 1970 dealing with 1.15 factor. (See Section 3(1) of this Agreement).

Question 9: If an engineer works off an extra list, is that considered a “class of service”?

Answer: Yes.

Question 10: During his test period Engineer D works in passenger service. Subsequent to “M” Day he is in passenger service but the earnings are reduced due to changes in the passenger assignments. Engineer D can hold a turn in the freight pool, local freight, road switcher, mine run, helper service, yard service, or extra board. Can the earnings of a junior engineer in these classes of service be charged against Engineer D?

Answer: No, if all earnings during test period were in passenger service.

Question 11: An engineer worked on extra board during a portion of his test period and balance of time on a local freight assignment but elects not to take such a job. Can earnings of a junior engineer on the extra board or in local freight service be held against his guarantee

Answer: Yes.

Question 12: Engineer E’s guarantee is $600.00—works 154.5 hours. May, 1970 earnings are $675.00 but he works 180 hours. In May his earnings for first 154.5 hours are $575.00.Would Engineer E be entitled to a $25.00 allowance under the protective agreement?

Answer: Yes.

Question 13: A Zoning or Home and Home Rule provides that senior engineers may return firing other than in seniority order, also that employees may be furloughed other than in seniority order and can remain furloughed while junior employees are working in another home zone unless it would require a new hire. Engineer F earns his guarantee (during test period) as an engineer at (X). If he later obtains a job as a fireman at (Y) which is another zone under Home and Home Rule on pre-existing seniority district, how will his “average monthly” guarantee be affected?

Answer: Can hold earnings of a junior engineer at (X) against his guarantee, on a one-for-one basis.

Question 14: G worked during his test period in freight pool service at (Y). How will his “average monthly” guarantee be affected if he voluntarily bids in a yard engine at (X) as an engineer at a time he could remain as a fireman in freight pool service at (Y)?

Answer: If a junior employee in freight pool service at (Y) makes more money than Engineer G in yard service at (X), such earnings may be held against his guarantee on a one-for-one basis.

Question 15: Engineer H worked as an engineer in the “M” zone during his test period. Due to reduction in business he can no longer hold a job as engineer in this zone. Can he take a job firing in the “M” zone and still receive his “average monthly” guarantee at a time he could hold a job as an engineer at (P)?

Answer: Yes, unless a non-protected employee otherwise would be required as engineer at (P) for other than emergency service.

Question 16: If employee held seniority at terminals (A), (B), (C) and (D), and during his test period earned all his guarantee at terminal (A). If he exercised seniority on the highest paying job his seniority would let him hold at terminal (A), could he be required to exercise seniority on higher paying job at terminal (B), (C) or (D)?

Answer: No.

Question 17: If test period earnings were made at terminals (A) and (B) in pool freight and local freight service, respectively, would he be required to place on the highest paying job at either (A) or (B)?

Answer: No, but highest paid job in the particular class of service at (A) or (B) could be held against him in computing guarantee.

Question 18: An engineer worked an average of 12 hours a day, 5 days a week, during test period, which is equivalent to 14 straight time hours per day. He worked 22 days per month so average monthly hours would be 308 hours. He earned “average monthly” guarantee of $924.00 or $3.00 per hour. He lays off one day during a current month and only works 21 days this month, equivalent to 294 straight time hours. Assuming the assignment worked 12 hours on the day off and earned $76.50, what will be deducted from his guarantee.

Answer: $42.00 (308 hours—294 hours = 14 hours x $3.00).

Question 19: If an engineer is working yard service where the 5-day work week is in effect, may Carrier offset guarantee because an engineer was not available to work on his rest days?

Answer: Yes, to the extent of his average monthly hours. However, existing agreement or practice will be followed in calling engineers to work when the engineers’ extra board is exhausted, If the engineer misses a call on his rest day and service missed held against guarantee, the 1. 15 transition factor will not apply to that particular work week.

Question 20: There are six engineers holding passenger assignments that made their test period earnings in freight pool service. Are the earnings of the freight pool held against the test period of these engineers? With their seniority all of them can hold turn in the freight pool.

Answer: Yes.

Question 21: Engineers A, B, C and D are on the engineers’ extra board. Engineer A misses a call, which results in Engineers B and C also missing the call, and Engineer D works the vacancy. Can the earnings made by extra Engineer D be used to reduce the guarantee due extra Engineers A, B and C or just extra Engineer A?

Answer: Would apply the 1.2 and 9-hour factors provided in Item 4 of April 10, 1970 Agreement (see Section 3 (c) of this Agreement) against each one who missed the call.

Question 22: Engineer J during his test period worked in freight pool at terminal (X). Due to reduction in business Engineer I can no longer hold a pool turn at (X) but can hold a pool turn at terminal (Y), both terminals within his seniority district. Can Engineer I take a yard engine at (X) (where he earned his guarantee) and be paid his full average monthly guarantee, or could he be required to exercise his seniority in pool service at (Y)?

Answer: Engineer J may exercise seniority to any other class of service (including extra board) at (X) but the earnings of a junior engineer assigned to a higher paid job at terminal (X) may be held against his guarantee on a one-for-one basis.

Question 23: Engineer I in Question 22 voluntarily exercises his seniority to another terminal where he did not work at all during his test period. Can he take any job there without affecting his guarantee?

Answer: He may exercise his seniority in any class of service but earnings of a junior engineer assigned on a higher paid job working out of that terminal may be held against his guarantee, on a one-for-one basis.

Question 24: Engineer K during his test period worked in freight pool at terminals (X) and (Y) and subsequent to “M” Day is located at terminal (X) with insufficient seniority to work in freight pool. He exercises seniority to freight pool at terminal (Y). May earnings of a junior engineer in any other class of service at terminal (Y) be held against his guarantee?

Answer: No.

Question 25: Engineer L during his test period worked in freight pool at terminal (X) and subsequent to “M” Day is located at terminal (X) with insufficient seniority to hold an engineer’s job at terminal (X) and is required under provisions of the Merger Agreement to exercise seniority at terminal (Y). Can he take any job at terminal (Y) without affecting his guarantee?

Answer: He may select the freight pool at terminal (Y) without affecting his guarantee. If he elects to take a job in any other class of service, the earnings of a junior engineer assigned to any other class of service at terminal (Y) may be held against his guarantee.

Question 26: An engineer made all his earnings during test period in freight pool but there was a high paying assigned local working out of same terminal. After “M” Day, the engineer cannot hold pool so places on a switch engine but Carrier holds earnings of local against the engineer. Later the engineer can again hold a turn in the pool and places thereon. Can Carrier still hold earnings of junior engineer on high paying local against guarantee?

Answer: No.

Question 27: During test period engineer worked only 5 days per week on a 5-day week job in pursuance of the July 18, 1957 BLE National Agreement. On July 1, 1970 the 5-day work week becomes effective. Would an adjustment be proper to reduce engineer’s ‘‘average monthly’’ guarantee?

Answer: If engineer works a 5-day week engineers’ job for 50 per cent or more of tours of duty during test period, the 1.15 transition factor would not be applicable.

Question 28: Engineer M’s guarantee is $800.00 per month. In April, 1970, Engineer M earns only $500.00, which would not call for maximum Railroad Retirement Tax deduction. Would Carrier hold enough out of his guarantee to make the maximum Railroad Retirement tax payments?

Answer: Yes.

Question 29: An engineer during his test period worked as a fireman in yard service on a 5-day per week basis for 50 per cent or more of the time. He is now working as engineer in yard service under 5-day week rules. May the 1.15 transition factor of the Agreement of April 10, 1970 be applied against his engineer earnings in computing guarantee?

Answer: No. See Section 3(i) of this Agreement.

Question 30: During the test period an engineer worked a part of the time on a so-called outlying assignment. Is such engineer required to work on such outlying assignment to protect his guarantee if there is a junior engineer assigned?

Answer: No. However, the earnings of the junior engineer may be held against his guarantee on a one-for-one basis.

Question 31: If an engineer is currently allowed make-up guarantee payment, for example, to the extent of $50.00 for month of June, 1970 and then four or five months later a claim is allowed involving a violation of some rule of the collective agreement in June, 1970 which amounts to $60.00, may the Carrier offset the guarantee payment of $50.00 allowed for month of June, 1970 against the $60.00 for the rule violation payment?

Answer: Yes.

Question 32: The “monthly allowance” is subject to be increased by future general wage increases beginning with the month in which wage increase becomes effective. If a wage increase of five per cent is agreed to on July 1, 1970 but is retroactive to January 1, 1970, when will “monthly allowance” be increased?

Answer: Effective July 1, 1970.

Question 33: If a protected employee currently received a payment to make up his guarantee and subsequently receives back pay for a retroactive general wage increase, will the make-up payment previously allowed be used to offset amount of back pay?

Answer: No.

Question 34: Will payment of back-pay adjustment for general wage increase be applied against guarantee in month in which paid?

Answer: No.

Question 35: Give an example of applying the 1.15 transition factor of Agreement of April 10, 1970. (See Section 3(1) of this Agreement). Answer: An engineer subject to the 1.15 adjustment factor has a monthly guarantee of $900.00 a month. The 5-day week was not in effect during the test period. Since the test period the 5-day week has been put into effect and he works 22 days without any overtime in a month in which he makes claim for guaranteed earnings, $742.94 ($33.77 x 22 days). He did not lose any days from his assignment nor were there any other circumstances present that would offset his guarantee.

30.45 (applicable 7 day yd. rate)
x l. 15 (transition factor)
35 .0175

 35.02 (transition rate — per day)
-30.45 (applicable 7 day yd. rate)
$ 4.57 (daily transition factor money amount)

$100.54 (monthly transition factor money amount) ($4.57x22 days)
+742.94 (actual monthly earnings —see above)
$843.48 (total compensation to be applied against monthly guarantee)

$900.00 (monthly guarantee)
-843.48 (total compensation to be applied against monthly guarantee)
$ 56.52 (payment due)

Question 36: The Agreement of April 10, 1970 (see Section 3(i) (5) of this Agreement) dealing with transition factor for 5-day work week exempts application where in a current work week engineers are “required” to work 6 or 7 days in yard service. If an engineer works on his rest day from a so-called “Hog Board” when extra list is exhausted, will the 1.15 transition factor apply?

Answer: No. it will not apply to any day in that particular work week.

Question 37: An engineer places in freight pool and is available for all service falling to his pool turn. Can the higher earnings of a junior engineer in the same pool be held against his guarantee?

Answer: No.

Question 38: An engineer places on an engineers’ extra board and is available for all service in his turn from such extra board.

Can the higher earnings of a junior engineer on the same extra board be held against his guarantee?

Answer: No.

Question 39: The Carrier is in the process of preparing “Job Ratings” which will be posted showing approximate monthly earnings of all assignments, including freight pool and extra boards. What is the purpose of such “Job Ratings”?

Answer: They are to be posted as a matter of information to assist employees in placing on highest paid jobs available to them in the exercise of seniority under the rules and as may be required by the Merger Protective and Implementing Agreements and for the use of Carrier officers in processing guarantee claim forms.

Question 40: Are the “Job Ratings” any guarantee that jobs will earn amount of money posted?

Answer: No.

Question 41: Will these “Job Ratings” once posted be subject to change?

Answer: Yes, whenever the Carrier feels that the approximate earnings on a particular job have changed sufficiently to justify posting a change.

Question 42: Does a change in “Job Ratings” require or extend the exercise of seniority contrary to existing agreements?

Answer: No.

Question 43: Does a change in “Job Ratings” affect the guarantee due an engineer who places on the assignment prior to the posted change?

Answer: No.

Question 44: Employee A, who is a member of a regular yard crew, is to be treated as occupying a position on a local freight crew, which position is listed at $800. Such local freight position actually earned $775. Should Employee A be credited with $800 or $775?

Answer: $775, the actual earnings of the assignment which he is being treated as occupying.

Question 45: Employee A, who is a member of regular yard crew, is occupying the position producing the highest rate of pay and compensation to which his seniority entitles him under the working agreement and files claim for monthly guarantee. His monthly guarantee exceeds the rate listed for the position, as well as the compensation he received covering all the work available to him under the working agreement during the month of claim. Is he entitled to the difference between the listed rate of the position and amount of his monthly guarantee, or the difference between the compensation he received and the amount of his monthly guarantee?

Answer: The employee is entitled to receive the difference between the compensation he received and the amount of his monthly guarantee.

Question 46: What is the purpose of computing “average hourly” rate in the test period?

Answer: This will be used in computing offsets against the guarantee for time lost. See Example in Question 7.

Question 47: An engineer in test period worked predominantly in passenger service, had average monthly earnings of $1165 and average monthly hours of 222. For purpose of this question predominantly is agreed to mean that in test period engineer was assigned in ten months in passenger service and his average hourly rate is equal to $4.75 per hour or more as of “M” Day. Although he can still hold passenger turn, he voluntarily elects to place in freight pool and earns $1210 in a month but worked 268 hours. In first 222 hours he earns $1000. Is any adjustment due account of his earnings for first 222 hours being less than test period?

Answer: No. He voluntarily placed in a different class of service which produces a lower hourly rate than the engineer’s average hourly rate computed for service during test period. This answer will not apply to an engineer who did not work predominantly (as described in question) in passenger service during test period.

Question 48: What is the time limit for filing of claims by an individual?

Answer: Claim must be filed on agreed-to form within thirty (30) days after the end of payday for the last half earnings of previous month. For example, payday for last half of June falls on July 16. Claim for June must be filed before August 15.

Section 4

(a) If, subsequent to the date of this Agreement, officials, supervisory or fully excepted personnel and organization representatives exercise seniority rights in a craft or class of employees protected under said Agreement, then, during the period such seniority is exercised, such officials, supervisory or fully excepted personnel and organization representatives shall be entitled to the same protection afforded by the said Agreement to employees in the craft or class in which such seniority is exercised, and no employee subject to said Agreement shall be deprived of employment or adversely affected with respect to compensation and rules governing working conditions, fringe benefits, or rights and privileges pertaining thereto, by the return of the official, supervisory, or fully excepted employee to work under the schedule agreement.

(b) In applying Section 3 when determining the “average monthly compensation” for employees referred to above, it is understood that:

(1) As to “full time” General Chairmen (General Chairmen who do not work in the class or classes in which they hold seniority while holding office as General Chairman), the individual’s average monthly compensation for the last 12 months in which he performed service in a class in which he holds seniority will be determined and that amount increased by the percentage equivalent of general wage increases applicable to the class in which he last performed service prior to taking office as General Chairman which have been made effective while he has been serving as General Chairman. The same formula shall be applied for railroad officials, supervisory or fully exempt personnel.

(2)—(a) As to other than “full time” General Chairmen, Local Chairmen, Grand Officers, Organization representatives and delegates to labor organization conventions, their “average monthly compensation” will first be arrived at as provided in Section 3 as particularized by Paragraph 1 above. The “average monthly compensation” as thus determined will then be increased by the amount of 1.2 basic day’s pay at the rate of service in which engaged at the time the individual laid off for each date on which the individual lost time (or, in the case of an extra man, was laying off,) to participate in organization business.