Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, April 21, 1990 TAG: 9004210058
SECTION: BUSINESS PAGE: A5 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: GREG EDWARDS Business writer
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
But the decision was aimed at the railroad's workers rather than its locomotives. Effective last July 1, NS ordered a ban on tobacco smoking in all of its offices.
The Transportation Communication's Union, which represents the railroads clerks, protested that smoke was not the only thing that smelled foul about NS' new rule.
The union claimed that the smoking ban - which NS unilaterally implemented - was a change in a condition of employment recognized by railway labor law and should have been negotiated with the company's unions.
An arbitrator agreed with the union, forcing NS to back away from a total smoking ban and once again, at least in some offices, NS workers are lighting up.
When the railroad announced the smoking ban in April 1989, it said a survey of the company's workers favored restrictions by a 3-1 margin. Only 27 percent of NS workers currently smoked, the survey showed.
Ron Rankin, the TCU's general chairman for NS' Norfolk and Western Railway, agrees that roughly two-thirds of the union's members don't smoke and don't like smoke around them. When NS banned smoking, some union members wrote Rankin protesting the action but many others wrote praising the new policy.
All the union is asking for is designated smoking areas in the offices that are properly ventilated, Rankin said. The union is willing to sit down and negotiate that position, he said.
Arbitrator I.M. Lieberman said that's what NS should have done. The smoking ban is a totally new condition of employement with disciplinary implications, Lieberman said. "A change of such magnitude must be negotiated," he said.
Although the right to smoke is not spelled out in the union contract, restricted smoking had been allowed for the past 100 years in the railroad's offices and as such was an implied contractual condition, Rankin said.
The railroad must negotiate with the union to change such a condition, Rankin said. NS had claimed it had the right to order the ban as a health and safety regulation.
The matter is still not resolved, Rankin said.
In a March 20 letter, NS said that where reasonable it would provide indoor areas where employees might go to smoke during their normal recess periods. The letter said there might be offices where it would not be possible to locate smoking areas, Rankin said.
Rankin said he was "pretty surprised" to find out that the railroad was unable to find a place for smoking in terminals like the one at Detroit, where the company has a substantial number of workers.
On the other hand, Rankin said NS had established an area at the new Roanoke Terminal yard office at Shaffers Crossing that is "pretty much" what the union has been looking for.
NS has still not negotiated the issue with the union, but maintains it has complied with the arbitrator's ruling, Rankin said. "Our position is everything we've done is in compliance with the award," said NS spokesman Don Piedmont.
The union still wants to negotiate and may go back to Lieberman, who maintained jurisdiction over the dispute, to seek an interpretation of his ruling, Rankin said.
Meanwhile, NS has continued an offer to pay half the cost for workers to attend company-approved stop-smoking programs, up to a maximum of $75.
by CNB