BY RUTH ROBINETT
NEW YORK - On November 2, officials of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees (BMWE) and Amtrak announced a tentative settlement, averting a November 6 strike deadline. The maintenance union represents some 2,300 workers at the national passenger railroad.

The central issue in the dispute has been the union's proposal for wage increases of 3.5 percent in 1995, 1997, and 1999. The union's demands would put the wages of maintenance workers at Amtrak on par with those of BMWE members working on Class 1 freight railroads. Amtrak rejected this out-of-hand, announcing its decision to the press without informing the union. In response the union set a strike deadline of October 22.

Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater joined Amtrak chairman Thomas Downs and BMWE General Chairman Jedd Dodd at the announcement. The Clinton administration has actively intervened throughout the dispute against the union. In August, using provisions of the Railway Labor Act. President William Clinton enjoined the union from striking and appointed an emergency board to make proposals to settle the dispute. The board recommended accepting the union's wage proposal while referring work rules and other issues to negotiations.

The Railway Labor Act, passed by Congress in 1926, imposes a barrier to strikes for which there is little parallel elsewhere in U.S. industry. Railroad workers are saddled with the most complex labor laws on the books. The law proclaims that every decision by railroad unions to fight for major contract gains is followed by months of mediation, arbitration, and special boards. These mediation and arbitration boards are stacked against labor. During their meetings the old contracts remain in effect. This gives the railroads and the press time to mount propaganda campaigns against the workers.

As a participant at the bargaining table with the union and Amtrak's Board of Directors, Slater twice appealed to the union to extend the strike deadline, first winning an extension until October 29, and on the eve of the 2nd deadline gaining an eight- day extension until November 6.

The union and the company agreed to not disclose details of the settlement until it is submitted to the BMWE membership for ratification and the Amtrak Board of Directors for approval. The November 3 New York Times reported however, that Slater said the deal with the union was "historic because it included provisions under which the railroad and the workers would receive benefits from productivity gains."

Under the deal Amtrak would save $7 million in annual work rule concessions. The union promised to work out an additional $6 million in concessions. The union is expected to receive less than the 3.5 percent wage increases sought, and the agreement is contingent upon Congressional approval of $2.3 billion for Amtrak's capital funding.

The dispute has focused public discussion on the funding of a national passenger railroad. In announcing the strike settlement, Secretary Slater urged Congress to consider ways to keep the passenger rail line from going bankrupt. "There is clearly a role for Congress to play because the issue we are dealing with is not just the strike," he said. "Ultimately, we have to deal with the long-term viability of Amtrak." That budget agreement established a downward "glide path" into the next decade in which Amtrak would gradually get no operating subsidies. An October 29 Wall Street Journal editorial opined, "We've never been fans of keeping Amtrak on life support, and we agree it ought to be privatized."

Throughout the dispute a concerted campaign to whip up a hysteria against the maintenance workers, blaming them for inconveniencing professionals and other middle class layers, was orchestrated by Amtrak, other railroads, the business press and other media, and politicians.

"Commuter doomsday is detailed, Fears of Amtrak strike" was the headline of an October 16 Daily News article here in New York. The first line says, "Transit officials have a one-word prediction for next week's threatened Amtrak strike: pain"

New Jersey Transit issued a notice to passengers warning, "If a strike occurs, railroads throughout the country, including NJ Transit will not be able to operate rail service on portions of railroad which are owned and maintained by Amtrak." New Jersey Governor Christine Whitman created an Emergency Transportation Council to "oversee statewide contingency plans in case of a strike." During the "cooling off" period, flashing gridlock alert signs on major New Jersey highways warned of the impending strike. Signs posted in subways and all over Penn Station cautioned commuters to be prepared for long lines and delays.

The Wall Street Journal joined the antiunion fray. Editorializing under a banner of "Who's Killing Amtrak?" they called the threatened strike "a pique" and whined about "Amtrak's archaic labor laws." New York Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan protested that unions shouldn't "close down the enterprise on which they survive."

Even without the wage increases, Amtrak has projected that it will have to borrow $100 million, its most ever, to meet expenses for the current fiscal year, which ends next September. In addition, the passenger railroad is carrying a debt of about $1 billion from new locomotives and other equipment it bought to modernize its fleet.

The tentative contract settlement is contingent on the approval of a so-called "reform" bill for the railroad, a step that would free $2.3 billion that Congress set aside this summer for capital aid to Amtrak. It is also contingent upon Congress releasing $200 million allocated this year for capital expenses and allowing Amtrak to use it for operating expenses, including salaries. In asking Congress for more money, Amtrak is assuming that the other rail unions, several of which are in current negotiations, will seek the same raise if it is given to the Maintenance of Way union.

Another provision of the "reform" bill is aimed at weakening union protections, allowing Amtrak to contract out work, potentially laying off its entire clerical, track, signal, and mechanical forces so it can use nonunion labor. In addition, the legislation aims to alter the layoff protection the union won with Amtrak's inception. Federal law guarantees veteran workers six years' income if laid off due to route changes. The Wall Street Journal editorial page called this protection "the outrageous nature of Amtrak's featherbedding contracts."

Scrawled above this antilabor editorial posted on the bulletin board in the crew room at Amtrak's Penn Station was "this shows what the ultra-rich parasites think of people who work an honest job for a living." This comment reflects the growing sentiment afoot after four weeks of approaching strike deadlines.

If all the promised funding does not come through Amtrak can cancel the contract and take 30 days to negotiate before the union will have the right to strike if an agreement is not reached. Given the various funding contingencies connected to the tentative settlement and the union's upcoming vote on the contract, the Philadelphia Inquirer noted, "Whether the deal will stick remains open to question."

Ruth Robinett is a member of United Transportation Union Local 1370.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home