Does anyone really know which agreements or working conditions have been changed, or the past practice or precedents ACRE has allowed the MTA to establish since they began operation in March of 2000? It is not a simple task to determine because no one is sure to what degree ACRE has allowed the MTA to compromise our agreements. Here is a partial list of some changes that we are aware of:

1. 14B, 17B: The “challenge” of these rules by the company began shortly after ACRE began operation. Doyle and Bottalico both stated they wouldn't take the dispute to a board because they felt they would lose. How do you know unless you try to dispute the issue? And if you commit the effort, how can you be any worse off than if you did nothing? Changes in the agreements language and modified turnpoints were the end result.

2. Separation of service: Has anyone in yard service been paid a four (4) hour separation of service claim for performing passenger work, such as a passenger extra? ACRE officers have informed yard crews to “put in a 17B, get paid the three (3) hours, and we'll fight for the other hour”. Has anyone received the “other hour”? Other changes have been mentioned by yard crews. By submitting a 17B for separation of service agreement work, especially if the claim is paid, the agreement becomes diluted and this allows the company to establish past practice and precedent to eventually eliminate the agreement totally. Other examples are available, but the point is made.

3. Sick time abuse policy: ACRE did not dispute the implementation of the policy. When members started to receive investigation notices for abuse of the policy, most ACRE officers, especially Division 9 officers, encouraged members to sign a waiver instead of attending an investigation. An ACRE officer that advises members not to waive this right of appeal, is Lloyd Fishbeck. Lloyd always conducts each investigation in a thorough, professional manner, regardless of his union affiliation.

4. Implementation of ticket machines: ACRE did not attempt to obtain an agreement concerning the change in working conditions or for employee job protection in the event the ticket machine operation reduces train crew size in the future.

5. Extra list calling procedures: The practice of crew dispatches “jumping” available conductor list positions to make up extra assignments for available trainmen in position order behind the conductors.

6. Time limit for company to deny claims: The agreement provides (or used to) for the company to deny a claim within 30 days. If the company fails to issue a denial within this period, the claim is to be paid automatically. Some ACRE members found out after claims they submitted were not paid within the 30 day period that ACRE had allowed the company an “extension”. Bob Felicetta was asked about the 30 day rule. His response, “it's not like that anymore”. Dennis Perri was quizzed by a member on this issue, response – “we didn't give it up, we gave the company an extension”. The length of the “extended” period was not explained.

7. GCT yard limits extended to CP 10. Why?

8. Claims: How many members in train and engine service have submitted various claims and have been informed about the merits of the claim from the “company's position”. How about “we won't submit the claim to keep the company happy”. Or a mishandled claim (for example) “Are you sure you want to submit that claim, you're going to be here a long time?” Or as Bottalico once informed a member when he refused to handle a mishandled claim, “who should I believe, you or the company?”

9. Martin Luther King Day: Is not a holiday for Metro North employees. ACRE allows the company to operate a holiday schedule, plus scheduled employee training.

10. Good Friday: Good Friday used to be a working holiday. You would work your regular schedule, receive time and half, plus holiday pay. Now, you receive a holiday schedule, and maybe you are scheduled off. Does the employee or the company benefit from this change?

11. Blackout: How many train and engine employees did not receive the full earnings of their assignments when they were unable to cover their assignments the day after the blackout because of hours of service violations? The agreement provides for payment of the earnings from your run schedule if you are unable to work your assignment. ACRE allowed the provision to be waived for the blackout. Whenever an issue affects the members, the senior ACRE officers assume the company's position.

The “Historic” ACRE Contract

It does not matter how ACRE attempts to portray the Tier IV Pension, we have not received the management pension plan “except for three minor details” as ACRE promised during the contract's promotion. ACRE has not secured the health and welfare provision management enjoys. Where is the plan document?

The Vacation Wheel: What can now be said about the wheel? A Division 9 officer, after receiving complaints from his members about the vacation wheel, blamed Bottalico for the concept. That's okay, a Division 1 officer after hearing a complaint about the contract blamed the contract on Doyle. Are they even with the finger pointing? Several weeks ago Bottalico was handing out pizza in the GCT crew room. A member questioned why the pick was not performed within the guidelines of the vacation wheel as ratified by the membership. The member pointed out that the membership ratified a first round pick under the vacation wheel between 9/1 and 12/31, except for prime weeks. The first round of the vacation pick was actually opened up for the entire year, except for prime weeks. Bottalico's response was less than informative.

Did everyone say farewell to their $100,000 life insurance coverage? The LIRR didn't. They still have the coverage.

To any ACRE members that never had the chance to receive the 2 nd choice holiday, now you never will have the opportunity.

Veteran's Day for the day after Thanksgiving? Any ideas who benefited from this give back? It wasn't the members.

Health and Welfare co-payment for new hires: ACRE's position was, is, we can't negotiate for someone that isn't here yet. By introducing this feature, ACRE opened the door for all employees to co-pay for health and welfare coverage. ACRE will tell you this is not true, but all other MTA unions believe it is, as do probably most ACRE members. ACRE did not even possess the presence of mind to cap the percentage of the company's cost on the amount paid by the employee 18% of the MTA's cost and no cap on the cost.

No cap on the 3% employee pension contribution: Ouch! The only commuter railroad or state agency in New York State that has the pension, and does not have a cap on the employee contribution and has a co-payment of health and welfare feature in their contract is here, on Metro North, the culprit, ACRE's contract . Does anyone believe that if ACRE does negotiate the next contract that it won't cost anything to have the 3% employee contribution capped at 10 years? ACRE's right, this is a great contract, for the MTA, not the employees.

If anyone has anything to add to this list, please do. As stated, we really don't know the extent of ACRE's givebacks, some issues may have not been included.