WEBSITE UPDATE, APRIL 2008
Family Medical Leave Act
Since the Carriers lost their
battle for FMLA leave, they are now trying to usurp the law by attacking with
DOL Regulations. They have issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to circumvent
the law. A Department of Labor official stated that employers may adjust pay for workers taking intermittent
leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act, but must keep other benefits intact,
so that if the lesser hours or pay drops the employee below what would normally
be a threshold for eligibility in medical or other coverage, those benefits
must nevertheless be maintained,.
Amtrak Reauthorization
A hearing was held on April 3 by the Senate Appropriations
Committee’s Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development and
related agencies regarding transportation appropriations, particularly the
Amtrak Appropriation for FY 09. Amtrak's President and CEO Alex Kummant said
that the passenger railroad would need $1.671 billion in federal assistance for
Fiscal Year 2009. He attributes the increase over the 2008 spending levels to
increases in wages, benefits, and fuel. Recent settlements with labor unions
mandate that Amtrak grant pay increases to its employees as well as issue back
payments in two lump sums, one in 2008 and one in 2009, for the years that
Amtrak employees worked without a contract. Kummant said that Amtrak can meet
its wage and back pay obligations for Fiscal Year 2008, but for 2009, it can
only meet its wage obligations and needs additional funds for the back pay.
Subcommittee
Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-WA) stated that the high price of gasoline is
pushing Amtrak to record ridership levels. She went on to say: “For the second
year in a row, the Bush administration has proposed cutting direct subsidies to
Amtrak by almost 40 percent. For Amtrak's critical operating and debt service
subsidies, which keep the railroad out of bankruptcy, the Bush administration
is proposing a cut of 64 percent. Once again, the administration is proposing
to decimate intercity rail transportation.”
Freight-rail Delays Cost Amtrak $137 million
in FY2006
The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Office of
Inspector General has released a report detailing the effects of freight-rail
delays on Amtrak.
The report, which was requested in February 2007 by Sen. Frank Lautenberg
(D-N.J.), states that in FY2006 the delays cost Amtrak almost $137 million in
overtime and fuel costs, and lost revenue, an amount equal to about 30 percent
of Amtrak’s federal operating subsidy.
More than 97 percent of Amtrak’s 21,000 route miles run along tracks owned and
maintained by freight railroads. The report states that between fiscal years
2003 and 2007, Amtrak’s on-time performance (OTP) for long-distance trains
outside of the Northeast Corridor (NEC) fell from an average of 51 percent to
42 percent, and OTP for shorter corridors outside the NEC fell from 76 percent to
66 percent. In comparison, OTP for Acela service,
which runs on the Amtrak-owned-and-operated NEC, currently stands at 86.1
percent.
In October 2007, the Senate passed Lautenberg’s Passenger Rail Investment and
Improvement Act of 2007 (S. 294), authorizing $1.6 billion for Amtrak over a
six-year period. The bill includes a provision that enables the Surface
Transportation Board to investigate Amtrak delays and issue fines to freight
railroads if the OTP of an individual route falls below 80 percent in two
consecutive quarters due to “freight interference.”
Section 211 of S.294 allows for
railroad that own infrastructure on which Amtrak operates, or any entity
operating as a rail carrier that has negotiated a contingent agreement, to
lease necessary rights-of-way from a rail carrier or rail carriers that own the
infrastructure on which Amtrak operates such routes, to petition the FRA to be
considered as a passenger rail service provider over that route in lieu of
Amtrak. We are opposed to Section 211. Amtrak was originally created in 1971
after the railroads that own the infrastructure sought to discontinue intercity
passenger service due to the operating losses they generated throughout the
1960s. These hugely profitable freight railroads should not now receive a
windfall by operating federally-subsidized passenger service. Further,
regarding leased trackage rights over these
railroads, no other entities in the
The Problems with S. 1889, the Railroad
Safety Enhancement Act of 2007
S. 1889 was placed on the Senate
Legislative Calendar on March 3. The bill includes a cap of 276 hours of
combined service time and limbo time per calendar month. The bill further
mandates time off duty at the home terminal: (1) of at least 48 consecutive
hours after six consecutive work days, (2) of at least 72 consecutive hours
after seven consecutive work days, or (3) a collectively-bargained alternative
approved by the FRA.
Regarding time off duty, the
Senate bill closely parallels the House version (H.R. 2095 passed in the House
in October 2007) by requiring a minimum of 10 hours’ undisturbed rest under all
circumstances. Extra rest equivalent to the duration of limbo time could be
taken at the option of the individual employee. Railroad and unions will also
be able to negotiate Hours of Service. There is no legitimate reason to apply
limbo time toward an Hours of Service cap because limbo time is neither time
off duty nor time on duty. It cannot justifiably be time on duty for some
purposes, but not for others.
S. 1889 also does little to stop
all but the most egregious limbo time abuse by the industry because it provides
a three-hour daily limbo time allowance with no cap. Any further relief would
have to come from the FRA, which would be granted limited regulatory authority
over Hours of Service.
HR. 2095 would impose a limbo time cap of 40 hours per month during the first year after enactment, 30 hours per month during the second year, and 10 hours per month thereafter.
We will let you know right away if S. 1889 goes to the floor
for a vote. Although we support the bill, we are hoping that if it is passed,
the differences with the limbo time issue can be worked out when the bills are
referred to the conference committee.