Will the union come out ahead?

The RRD conductors went to their final PEB board in last year, in which SEPTA finally gave in and gave them what they wanted at the bargaining table 2 and 1/2 years after their previous contract had expired now that the conductors were surely going to walk. The junior members and anyone highered after its ratification really took one in the chin. That contract they signed, in effect, only was good until July 2005 (if I remember rightly) and now they, the UTU, are back to square one again. The BLET's contract expired earlier this year, and SEPTA isn't talking to them seriously yet either.

Just goes to show that striking is a valuable tool, and its too bad the RR doesen't have it.

Does anyone remember the circumstances around the 1983 RR strike? This was the transition point between Conrail and SEPTA for former PRR/RDG employees. I'm curious how they were able to walk then, and for as long as they did.

From what I gathered from speaking to some of those guys (ex Reading and Pennsy) was that SEPTA tried to pay them like they were bus drivers, and treat them like they were bus drivers (engineers and conductors alike). SEPTA didn't want to pay them like other railroads in the country do, and they do not to the present day. Those guys, particularly from the Reading and Conrail, really got screwed over as far as seniority. The seniority list was dovetailed 3 Pennsy to 1 Reading man. For example, a Pennsy man may have hired on Jan. 1, 1970 and the next two men on the Pennsy list may have hired a year later in 1971 (for argument sake). A Reading man with more seniority than the latter would be #4 on the seniority list, and so on and so forth. Pennsy had a larger number of employees, so they got preference. This, understandably, caused a LOT of animosity towards the Authority, the unions, and each member. I believe they sat out for 108 days, only to return to sign a contract that was WORSE than the one originally offered. I don't know all of the details, but that is as much as I got from some of those effected. Those who had enough seniority exercised their "flowback rights" and returned to Conrail. If SEPTA had it their way, the RRD would be a light rail. Newtown come to mind anyone?

Wasn't Newtown one of the union's gripes? That strike is what ended the service, so my guess is the union demanded that "the authority" not operate railroad lines with transit employees.

The story I got was that is was the crash that pretty much ended rail service to Newtown. SEPTA had imported scabs from the city division (of which some are now supervisors on the RRD now) and trained them to operate the RDC's along the branch. The rail unions didn't have a choice in the matter. From what I'm told, SEPTA operated single cars along the Newtown line. The rumor, which is totally believable, is that the single car did not shunt the circuit to actuate the gates for the road crossing (I think it was Southampton Rd.) so the tanker had no way of knowing that a train was coming. I guess thats probably why most commercial vehicles have the sticker on their bumpers stating that they stop at all railroad highway grade crossings. If anything, the rail unions had a legitimate 'gripe' about SEPTA bringing over motormen from the city division subways and training them to operate trains on the RRD. Allowing that to continue would have been detrimental to their future employment. The rail unions wanted to protect their work, SEPTA wanted to operate a lightrail service, and it went down in flames (no pun intended). SEPTA found out the hard way that you can't run the Reading lines like subways, shamefully and sorryfully, it came at the expense of peoples' lives.

jfrey40535 wrote:Does anyone remember the circumstances around the 1983 RR strike? This was the transition point between Conrail and SEPTA for former PRR/RDG employees. I'm curious how they were able to walk then, and for as long as they did.

The short answer is that with their employer (Conrail) exiting the commuter business by federal mandate, the employees had to start from scratch with new contracts with their new employers. The New York roads chose to (more or less) continue the old contract terms and came to agreement with their unions before January 1. SEPTA felt it could not afford to maintain the status quo, and insisted on significant contract changes: not just to wage rates, but also to how crews were paid and assigned. The unions did not want to work under the terms SEPTA offered, so they went on strike. The usual RLA restrictions on a strike did not apply since there was no existing contract between SEPTA and the unions.

As mentioned above, the strike lasted 108 days. Whether the terms of the final agreement were better or worse than what had been offered earlier is for the workers themselves to judge. They were certainly worse than what those who stayed at Conrail or went to other passenger railroads got, so as a result, there was the abovementioned "flowback" to Conrail and streams of workers leaving for jobs with Amtrak or NJT. This caused a crew shortage that went on for most of the 80s.

Thank you Matt Mitchell for your eloquent explanation. Your explanation is basically consistent with what I've been told by some of the parties who were involved in that strike. From what I have gathered from some of the guys that participated in that strike, the unions gave in to a contract that was similiar, if not worse, than what SEPTA had initially offered. SEPTA wanted to treat RRD employees like bus drivers, and they got their wish. Ride an early morning rush train, either a R-5 (Paoli side) or an R-2 from Warminster. Most of those guys are some of those former Conrail employees that can provide better, more detailed answers. Most of them didn't have enough seniority at that time to flowback to Conrail, and I'm sure they would have. Everything I said above is a culmination of the various accounts I've heard from them. Judging from what NJT and Amtrak crews have told me about their current way of doing things, I believe SEPTA guys got screwed by comparison as far as pay, work rules, seniority, overall work environment, and SEPTA's ubiquitous bus mentality.

It looks to me as though the TWU 234 members did come out ahead. 1 week's lost pay and 1% of salary to health care costs a year seems like a good deal to me. Doubtful they would have gotten anything better than that.

I totally agree.

whovian wrote:Thank you...

Well, there's a lot I left out, and a lot I don't know and I doubt we'll ever know, particularly about the intentions of SEPTA in the runup to the railroad takeover, and particularly with the Fox Chase Rapid Transit experiment.

One school of thought is that Fox Chase was a saber-rattling exercise intended to make clear to the rail unions that SEPTA would replace them if they would not settle on terms SEPTA could afford. But there is still a minority that says it was a serious experiment in trying a new way of managing and running a railroad.

Now that history doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the current state of the railroad, other than the fact that SEPTA is the only system to have the same operating management run both a railroad and a city transit system (other systems where commuter rail and transit are under the same authority, like MBTA, contract out commuter rail operations).

As far as pay and work rules go, I don't see any indication that SEPTA's wages and work rules are draconian--they're just not as generous as those of the New York roads. Management of the latter has preferred to keep labor peace by not demanding significant reforms. SEPTA couldn't afford to do that.

I guess there's a lot we'll never know about that part of history.

I

I think that the a combination of both arguments is also a possible school of thought. I don't think that SEPTA's pay scale and work rules on the RRD are draconian; but, they are certainly inconsistent with the pay and work rules of other railroads, and without getting into a very long explanation of my statement here, I'll just say that SEPTA treats its RRD personnel more like bus drivers than train crews (I know from personal experience). In essence, this was the price the unions paid after the strike in 1983. And I believe the comment about the condition of the railroad not necessarily having anything to do with the Newtown fiasco is plausible. I would, though, argue that the MENTALITY on SEPTA's part towards the railroad really hasn't changed much, and in some cases has regressed. A very, very small example (I could go on to more meaningful examples) is the conductors appearance. Hats are NOT required, everyone is wearing a diffrent uniform (blue, grey, clothes from home, baseball caps, etc.), white socks, sneakers, Dickies work pants,and conductors have virtually no authority on their train other than its movement. Most of these guys would be sent home on any other railroad. They're more like glorified ticket collectors. SEPTA has certainly made improvements to their railroad infrastructure as far as the physical plant. But, their management infrastructure leaves a lot to be desired. The GM nor the AGM has a clue about RRD. The upper management, without naming names, of the RRD has very little experience in anything relating to railroad. The lower management and supervisors (transportation managers) are mixed between former RRD (disgruntled)personnel and CITY DIVISION personnel with NO rail experience. SEPTA is a bus company, first and foremost, and it shows through and through.