During this meeting, one of our Local Chairmen quickly realized what was happening and by providing information as to what was discussed at the meeting, James Stem was able to provide the facts on the status of Positive Train Control Technology as well as insight on the reasoning for such outlandish and untruthful statements being put out by the Carrier. 

 

The purpose of the meeting was clearly a back door attempt to get members and Local union representatives to help the Carrier get what the Courts denied them the right to do -- one person crew operations.

 

We were told, shortly after the court's decision stopped the Carrier's attempt to force the UTU to negotiate crew consist on a National level, that the Carriers would try tactics such as this.
 
This information is being provided to the Local Chairmen and/or Local Officers who attended the meeting at Louisville, as well as to all other Local Chairmen and Local Officers, because I am certain that the Carrier's back door tactics will not stop there; and, to inform each of you of the facts verses the fiction put out by the Carrier as well as the REAL reasons behind such.
 
Please advise should you have any questions.
 
Fraternally yours,
Rufus McIntyre
General Chairman
 
Roy, Rufus, John, and John,
 
    I read with interest the report of Tony Ingram's Town Hall meeting on April 25 in Louisville, Kentucky.  His portrayal of the CSX Communication Based Train Management System (CBTM) was not accurate.
 
    The CBTM system testing waiver that FRA had granted to CSX was suspended in April 2004 because of many problems with the testing of the system.  CSX would not respond to FRA requests for timely reports on the progress of the testing, and continuing problems that produced a Zero percent reliability for the 30 days preceding the suspension of the waiver.
 
    CSX has not been able to operate a train to test this system or to work on the problems with the CBTM system for the past two years because FRA pulled their authority to test the system.
 
    CSX has applied to FRA for authority to restart the testing process for this CBTM system and BLE and UTU are filing joint comments on that docket.
 
    I doubt if Tony Ingram participated in a testing of a system on CSX before April 2004, but I am aware that he and other Railroad Executives traveled to Beardstown, Illinois to ride on a BNSF test train that is part of a similar system called Electronic Train Management System (ETMS).
 
    Both CBTM and ETMS are being developed by WABTEC Corporation.  WABTEC is a private corporation that is very interested in making a profit on the sale of these systems, and only has a secondary non financial interest in safety
 
    Neither CBTM or ETMS qualify as a defined Positive Train Control System.  CBTM is a second tier overlay system that is designed to prevent train to train collisions, stop the train when the authorized speed is exceeded, and provide an alert when approaching a defined roadway work authority.
 
    If money were no object, CSX could not implement this system even just on their dark territory within the next six years.  The design of the components of the system is still under development.  Once the design features are finalized, the components must be manufactured, installed, tested independently, and then tested connected as a system.
 
    BNSF has the only system currently being developed with a waiver from FRA.  BNSF made many ridiculous claims about their system being ready for system wide deployment in a short period of time.  They also claimed that WABTEC had developed these systems to enable the railroads to operate all their trains with a single person on the locomotive.  All those claims were directed at the Collective Bargaining processes and what they assumed would be an uninformed Congress.
 
    Obviously BNSF and our friend Tony Ingram are assuming that their responsibility to the communities that we serve, their responsibility to the emergency responders that protect the communities, and their responsibility to provide a safe place to work for their coworkers will all be ignored because the Bush Administration has promised to turn their head on safety issues.
 
    Well, that plan is not going well for them.  DOT and FRA know about the infant stages of development of these systems and have stated that "these two issues must be kept separate."  FRA is aware that single person operation completely changes the rail safety equation and the responsibility of the railroad.
 
    Grade crossing collisions, hot journals, dragging equipment, shifted lading, trespasser injuries and fatalities, immediate interaction with emergency responders, derailments, blocked crossings, and normal picking up and setting out of traffic are all reasons that at least a second crew member is required on every train.
 
    So what is the answer to the question:  "Why would our leader Tony Ingram make such an outlandish and untruthful statement in a meeting with his coworkers?"     The answer is simple:
  Politics and Arrogance.
 
    The railroads want to break the crew consist agreements that they signed in good faith and they are willing to be deceitful to try and scare our operating employees.  BNSF has a 115 mile test bed for the ETMS system operating under a waiver from FRA, that includes only 15 miles of rail integrity and switch position indicators, on their 32,000 mile system.  CSX, UP, NS, CN, CP, and KCS have nothing to show as far as development of a PTC system.  CSX, UP, and NS are talking about systems, but they are all many years away from deployment.
 
    But they have made assertions that they have a PTC system that will permit single person operation.  They also do not want you to ask where they will get the estimated $6 Billion to implement these systems if the design is ever finished.
 
    It is my full expectation that Tony Ingram will get to ride on a Magic Carpet before he gets to ride on a revenue train operating in a CBTM system not under a waiver.  Ingram like many of his counterparts will be retired and living on their nice estates long before the industry has a real PTC System.  I wonder if George Jetson accompanied Tony to Louisville?
 
    The sad reality of this debate is a PTC system would help save the lives of many of our members and also provide a new stability to the railroads operations.  The railroads want to bargain over the lives of their employees, not put the safety of the operation as their top priority.
 
    You are welcome to share this note with anyone that you would like, and I hope you will get this to our UTU members in Louisville that were present at Tony Ingram's meeting.
 

James Stem, Alternate National Legislative Director

United Transportation Union

304 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE

Washington, DC  20003-1130

(202) 543-7714

Fax  (202) 543-0015

                    Cell (202) 256-8021

                              Jamesastem@aol.com