One Reply to “PRELIMINARY INJUCTION FILINGS FOR HI-VIZ BOTH BLET AND BNSF”

  1. I tried my best to read all this. I just got done with the USUAL 38 hour tour of duty, and am looking at being home our “SO CALL CALLED ENJOYABLE SUBSEQUENT TIME OFF” OF 12 HOURS UNDISTURBED, PLENTY OF FAMILY TIME AH. I’M HAVING TO TYPE THIS ON THE LAPTOP. MY FOR IS IN PIECES AFTER IT MADE A HOLE IN THE WALL. I SURELY HOPE ARE UNION OFFICIALS HAVE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, REFLECTING HOW ACCURATE THE LINE UPS ARE, REFLECTING THE TIME IN SERVICE AND UNDER UMBRELLA TIME AT THE AWAY FROM HOME TERMINALS, I SURELY HOPE THEY HAVE LISTEND TO OUR CONCERNS AND HAVE WORKED OUT AWAY TO EXPLAIN HOW THIS “HI VIZ” IS UNREASONABLE WITH OUT A SINGLE DOUBT, UTILIZING FACTS SUCH AS; DO TO MEASURES THE CARRIER HAS IMPOSED ON US IE. HIGH IMPACT, 24HR MARK UP, LOW HOURS PERFORMANCE, AND SELF RELIVING NON GAURANTEED EXTRA BD POOLS. HAS IN PART PUT THEM IN THIS POSITION AND HAS SUBSEQUENTLY PLACED TY&E IN THIS UNREASONABLE SITUATION. I KNOW THERE IS A WAY, THOUGH THE POWERS TO BE, HAVE TO BE WILLING TO LISTEN AND HEAR REASON AND PUT THEM SELFS IN OUR SHOES, ONLY THEN WILL THEY UNDERSTAND. THE BNSF’S IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PREVIOUS PROCESSES ARE IMPART THEIR CAUSE FOR SUCH A DRASTIC CHANGE IN THE ATTENDANCE POLICY AND THEREFORE UNREASONABLE. IT IS UNREASONABLE AS IT STANDS ON ITS OWN, LET ALONE THE FACT OF THESE OTHER PROCESSES ALREADY IN PLACE( HIGH IMPACT DAYS PRIMARILY IMO) THIS POLICY IS ENTIRELY DESIGNED FOR ANY AND EVERY EMPLOYEE THAT HAS TO ADHERE TO IT, TO ULTIMATELY FAIL.

Leave a Reply