Eastern Railroad Discussion > Recent Court Ruling on FMLA Case re RRs

Source: http://www.ilcaonline.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2805&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

Posted by: michaelkuchta on Wednesday, February 15, 2006 - 02:42 PM

UNIONS BEAT RAILROADS IN DISPUTE PITTING FEDERAL LAW VS. CONTRACTS

Michael Kuchta, Editor, St. Paul Union Advocate

Collective bargaining language that lets workers decide when and how to take paid time off overrides provisions of the Family Medical and Leave Act, which lets employers make those decisions, a federal district judge says. The case – pitting more than a dozen unions against the nation’s four largest rail carriers – is a significant victory for workers, said St. Paul lawyer Charles Collins, who represented the Brotherhood of Maintenance Way Employees and was a lead attorney in the case.

The case overturns railroad policies that unilaterally substituted unused vacation, personal time or sick pay if workers took family or medical leave.

The Family Medical and Leave Act gives most workers the right to take up to 12 weeks in a year – typically unpaid – for their own medical treatment, to stay home after a birth or adoption, or to care for a family member

STOPPING EROSION BEFORE IT STARTS

The railroad polices, though consistent in some ways with FMLA, illegally attempted to override union contracts, the court ruling says.

The ruling stops in their tracks railroad attempts to erode union contracts, Collins said. “You’ve got to stop them on the first item. Anything that trumps your agreement – even if it starts small – is going to get big in a year or two.

“It’s like cancer. You can control it if you detect it early.”

The ruling is especially important for rail workers, he said. Because of the seasonal nature of many jobs, and the danger of the work, rail workers often spread paid vacation over the course of a year to maintain eligibility for disability pay and health insurance. “The railroads were very aware that this could help them wriggle out of a lot of health and welfare benefits,” Collins said.

By restricting how workers could take family and medical leave, Collins said, the railroads also were making it unlikely workers actually would exercise their rights. “If they could automatically grab your vacation, it would have a big chilling effect on your willingness to take leave unless you desperately needed it,” he said.

CASES CONSOLIDATED

The case dates back to 2001, when BNSF implemented the policy and other rail carriers – including CSX, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern – followed. Unions initially were divided on whether to challenge the policies, Collins said. But as it became clear the policies were affecting thousands of workers and virtually every craft, membership pushed union leadership to take action. “The chairmen – their phones were just ringing off the hook,” Collins said.

All the legal cases eventually were consolidated in Chicago, where Collins had filed his lawsuit. “We saw that Chicago was a place we could probably force the railroads to,” he said, because all the major roads had operations there. The railroads actually quit enforcing their policies, without an injunction, while the legal case unfolded.

It took federal judge Wayne R. Anderson, of the Northern District of Illinois, two years to wrap up the case, but in his decision, Anderson upholds the basic union argument. Though saying the railroads and unions both misinterpret FMLA, he makes his point clear in three key statements:

• “We find that the FMLA does not allow an employer to take away any contractual rights.”

• “The FMLA does not allow the carriers to take away rights the unions bargained for and won in CBA negotiations.”

• “The FMLA does not allow employers to violate pre-existing contractual obligations.”

Collins said he is certain the railroads will appeal Anderson’s ruling to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. But Anderson “crafted his opinion pretty carefully,” he said. “It’s a better order than any of the union counsel had hoped for.”

That's a major decision probably headed for the Supremes some day.