Search form

Surface Transportation Board Backs Railroad’s Denial of Service during Labor Dispute

  • October 13, 2015

The Surface Transportation Board (STB) has denied a petition by a Texas metal producer that, if approved, would have forced the Union Pacific Railroad Co. (UP) to restore rail service at the producer’s plant in the midst of an employee lockout. The STB is an economic and adjudicatory body affiliated with the U.S. Department of Transportation and set up by Congress, in part, to resolve railroad rate and service disputes.

Stating that the demand for UP’s rail service “is not a reasonable request under the present circumstances,” the three-member Board unanimously concluded last month that UP’s denial did not violate its common carrier rail service obligation to the metal producer.

“UP has shown that it evaluated the potential effects of providing service, acted with due diligence to provide service, and proposed to mitigate its inability to serve,” said STB.

Four hundred fifty members of the United Steelworkers union were locked out on October 11, 2014 in a contract dispute. On November 6, 2014, UP suspended shipments to a production facility. Between the two dates, UP provided twice weekly service to permit alternative planning. Yet, the dispute continued.

Since the service suspension, the company had to use trucks, which are more expensive and less reliable than rail, the company said. Moreover, its facility was not designed to handle regular trucking of lime shipments. The company also asserted that it had made at least five offers of assistance to UP to ensure uninterrupted service, all of which UP rejected.
 
UP countered that it had warned that rail service using union-represented employees would not be practical if pickets were set up at the plant, because UP’s union employees have consistently refused to cross picket lines over concern for their personal safety. UP would not require its employees to work under conditions they believed unsafe, the railroad added. The rail firm also contended that requiring its union employees to cross picket lines would undermine relations with its own workers.

STB said that the presence of a picket line alone does not justify denial of service. Rather, based on past legal precedent, a host of factors must be considered. In reaching its decision, STB relied upon three criteria: (1) the potential impact on UP employee relations and service, (2) the nature of the dispute, and (3) UP’s efforts at due diligence, including exploring alternate transportation options.

©2015 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

May 21, 2018

Supreme Court: Class Action Waivers in Employment Arbitration Agreements Do Not Violate Federal Labor Law

May 21, 2018

Class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), the U.S. Supreme Court has held in a much-anticipated decision in three critical cases. Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, No. 16-285; Ernst & Young LLP et al. v. Morris et al., No. 16-300; National Labor Relations Board v.... Read More

May 21, 2018

Supreme Court Rules Class Action Waivers in Employment Arbitration Agreements Valid

May 21, 2018

Class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements do not violate federal law, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in a much-anticipated decision in three critical cases. Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, No. 16-285; Ernst & Young LLP et al. v. Morris et al., No. 16-300; National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc., et al.,... Read More

May 16, 2018

Top Five Labor Law Developments for April 2018

May 16, 2018

The U.S. Senate confirmed John Ring’s nomination to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on April 11. Shortly thereafter, President Donald Trump named Ring as Board Chairman. Ring was sworn in as Chairman on April 16, replacing Republican Marvin Kaplan in that role. Trump nominated Ring, a management-side labor and employment... Read More