FRSA Voids Vague Safety Rules

It's official. Thanks to the Federal Rail Safety Act, railroads can no longer impose discipline based on vague safety rules that are triggered only when a worker reports an injury.

Every railroad has so-called "safety" rules stating employees must "be alert and attentive" and "take care to prevent injury to themselves" and "when in doubt take the safe course." Any worker who reports an injury automatically is in violation of such rules, whose only function is to provide a basis to discipline workers who report injuries. In effect, such rules prohibit employees from being injured, and then are used as a bogus basis to discipline workers who report an injury.

Those days are over. In a case where a conductor slipped on ice and was suspended for ten days after the railroad found he "was not alert" and "caused an injury to himself" and "did not take the safe course," OSHA's Whistleblower Office slapped the railroad with $100,000 in FRSA punitive damages, plus $25,000 for emotional distress. From now on, railroads that uses such vague "safety" rules to discipline injured employees are just asking to get hit with FRSA punitive damages. For the full text of the FRSA Award, click here.

A Salute to the Memory of Rail Union Rep Roger Lenfest

This entry honors the memory of Roger M. Lenfest, Jr., a courageous rail labor leader who has left us too soon. Roger’s railroad career spanned 40 years, most recently as a United Transportation Union General Chairman representing conductors on various carriers. But Roger's defining moment as a union rep came in 1985, when he was General Chairman for the conductors on the Boston commuter lines operated by Tim Mellon’s B & M Railroad.

Roger raised a safety issue about the lack of flagmen at construction sites on the mainline, and the B & M Railroad responded by firing one of his local chairman. The next morning, on November 4, 1985, Roger shut down the commuter rail service for the Boston region by ordering an unprecedented system-wide refusal to work under hazardous conditions. The B & M immediately obtained a temporary restraining order from the United States District Court in Boston ordering all employees back to work. The Railroad then fired all of Roger’s local chairmen and placed liens on their homes for millions of dollars in civil damages.

The trial judge ruled for the Railroad, but Roger kept the faith, and on September 2, 1986 the First Circuit Court of Appeals decided the first case ever under the original Federal Rail Safety Act when it issued a landmark decision overturning the trial judge and ruling that Roger's action was not an illegal strike but rather a refusal to work under hazardous conditions protected by the Federal Railroad Safety Act. B & M Corp. vs. Lenfest, et al., 799 F.2d 795 (1st Cir. 1986). We forced the Railroad to immediately reinstate Roger’s local chairmen and withdraw the liens on their homes. Roger then went on to win over $400,000 in back wages for his local chairmen in arbitration.

Here are the words from the Circuit Court decision establishing "the Lenfest principle":

To hold that union leaders can call for a concerted work stoppage only at the risk of being found liable for instigating an illegal strike is to place them in the position of having to choose between their own welfare and the lives of the employees. This is contrary to what Congress intended. We hold that where hazardous working conditions are the result of a system-wide failure to provide adequate protection so that employees are in danger of death or serious injury without knowing it, and the Union is aware of such danger, the Union may call a concerted work stoppage under the FRSA to protect the lives and safety of the employees.

The Railroad petitioned the United States Supreme Court for an appeal, but the Supreme Court refused, thus keeping the Lenfest decision in place as the law of the land. For the last 25 years Lenfest has stood as the leading case on the right of railroad workers to refuse to work under hazardous conditions.

Roger passed away last week at the age of 65. He will be missed, but never forgotten. Those of us who knew him can take some comfort in the fact that, although his voice will no longer be heard, the legacy of his fearlessness and vision will live on.

Another Judge Rules FRSA Not Derailed By CBA Appeals

Here's the latest judicial decision rejecting the bogus "election of remedies" defense railroads continue to raise in Federal Rail Safety Act cases. This one is especially sweet in that it allows a worker to continue her frontal attack against Norfolk Southern Railway's notorious practice of firing employees who report on duty injuries.

The facts are familiar to anyone who deals with Norfolk Southern. Latonya Milton reported an injury five days after the incident that caused the injury, and as usual NS fired her for filing an "untimely" injury report and for making "false and conflicting statements" regarding the reporting of her injury. She appealed the termination through her collective bargaining agreement, and also filed a FRSA complaint with OSHA's Whistleblower Office. NS argued that her CBA appeal was an "election of remedies" that precluded her from pursuing a FRSA claim.

Judge Malamphy rejected that argument, ruling Milton "is not precluded from appealing her termination pursuant to her collective bargaining agreement while simultaneously litigating this claim under the FRSA." NS asked for an immediate reconsideration, but to no avail. The Judge again concluded: "I find that the FRSA does not prevent an individual who has filed a grievance pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement from pursuing a complaint under the FRSA." How many times do judges have to rule before the railroads accept reality? For the complete text of both decisions, click here.

How To Disqualify Unsafe Rail Managers

Are you fed up with rail managers who habitually ignore safety rules and regulations, and then blame the workers who get hurt as a result of management's unsafe practices? Now you can do something about it. Here's how to disqualify such managers from ever working in the railroad industry again.

There is a little known Federal Rail Administration regulation that gives the FRA the power to permanently disqualify unsafe rail managers from railroad work. Entitled "Disqualification Procedures," it sets forth how the FRA bans managers and supervisors "who have demonstrated their unfitness to perform safety-sensitive functions by violating any rule, regulation, order, or standard prescribed by the FRA." It applies to all managers involved in a railroad's operations, track, equipment, or training departments.

The process begins when information about such a manager comes to the FRA's attention (more on that below). The FRA then issues a Notice of Proposed Disqualification charging the manager with violating one or more of the FRA's rules, regulations, or standards. The manager is then subjected to a public hearing before an administrative law judge where the FRA's Chief Counsel presents witnesses and documents proving the facts alleged in the Notice of Disqualification. If the charges are sustained, the judge then issues an order disqualifying the manager from any safety sensitive job on any railroad. The only appeal is to the FRA Administrator, whose decision is final and not subject to any further review. Thereafter any railroad that fails to inform prospective employers of a manager's disqualification or who actually hires a disqualified manager must pay penalties of up to $11,000 per day or $4 million per year.

Here's where you come in. In order for this process to work, the FRA needs to be provided with the information confirming a manager's violation of a safety rule or regulation. That means providing documents and the names of witnesses able to verify the manager's violation. So if you want to turn the tables on managers who ignore safety while blaming the workers who get hurt as a result, send a confidential email to charlie@trainlaw.com (or the designated legal counsel of your choice) explaining the manager's violation and listing the witnesses and documents that will confirm the violation. We will evaluate whether that information is strong enough for the FRA to pull the trigger on the unsafe manager.

And remember, if you do end up providing that information to the FRA, the Federal Rail Safety Act protects you from any retaliation by your employer railroad! So you have nothing to fear, and your co-workers and the FRA will thank you for it.