 |
Re: Railroad unions object to Santa Cruz railroad branch line contract
Author: OPRRMS
Date: 12-17-2011 - 18:38
Tie Plate Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The OP's linked article is likely related to
> ongoing sour grapes over UP crews losing their
> extra day or so of work on the branch, rather than
> some altruistic concern about the SERA crews and
> their well being.
I wasn't there so I don't know what was said, but the Sentinel article doesn't seem to imply anything about any "altruistic concern." Rather, it appears that Mr. Jessup's intention was to make the record aware of the pay and benefits disparity that typically exists between unionized and non-union railroad operations.
The Sentinel article is curious, however, in that it mentions UTU Local 153. Local 153 is in Spring Valley, New York. It's highly unlikely that anyone from that local would have knowledge of, or involvement in, this.
-------------------------------------------------------
> The OP's linked article is likely related to
> ongoing sour grapes over UP crews losing their
> extra day or so of work on the branch, rather than
> some altruistic concern about the SERA crews and
> their well being.
I wasn't there so I don't know what was said, but the Sentinel article doesn't seem to imply anything about any "altruistic concern." Rather, it appears that Mr. Jessup's intention was to make the record aware of the pay and benefits disparity that typically exists between unionized and non-union railroad operations.
The Sentinel article is curious, however, in that it mentions UTU Local 153. Local 153 is in Spring Valley, New York. It's highly unlikely that anyone from that local would have knowledge of, or involvement in, this.
