BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CBQ] Re: Fire Insurance

To: "CBQ@yahoogroups.com" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Re: Fire Insurance
From: Tom Lynch <thje@nntc.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 21:11:17 -0500
Delivered-to: unknown
Delivered-to: archives@nauer.org
Delivered-to: mailing list CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoogroups.com; s=lima; t=1345515076; bh=wU6pIrcdA26ntO6jzO1+U2oMVYRB5CVAlhN1U4msmWI=; h=Received:Received:X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Sender:X-Apparently-To:X-Received:X-Received:X-Received:X-Received:References:X-Mailer:In-Reply-To:Message-Id:To:X-Originating-IP:X-eGroups-Msg-Info:From:X-Yahoo-Profile:Sender:MIME-Version:Mailing-List:Delivered-To:List-Id:Precedence:List-Unsubscribe:Date:Subject:Reply-To:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Content-Type; b=N/lnCH3yIfJFJeOKVjXY0oTHrxjtIkWDx+B77vL1FJauyWlysDUKFkpYTctLCvPGs1bpu3o4kvbULGFNqmsqREEs6fyrI+NaI1AzIngw8LdtQ6qow9qC6Jtlq7tfn2QJ
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lima; d=yahoogroups.com; b=JCTMGXcRmVFzi/Xww6pNmXTQvhf9sDuuNdWUwZhnR9AKp4Sjktoq/MLN+gNl1Ap4B+MlcYrAW5KcJ/Kk5ppoK4UFEPgN2jn+hGtm1OqeWUvxG85xPn0a5FoiSIAhD8gF;
In-reply-to: <069CDE62-8AE8-41C3-9BBE-0BCF20C13E0A@yahoo.com>
List-id: <CBQ.yahoogroups.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Mailing-list: list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com
References: <2ce.1dd75250.3d643dd1@aol.com> <069CDE62-8AE8-41C3-9BBE-0BCF20C13E0A@yahoo.com>
Reply-to: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Sender: CBQ@yahoogroups.com


Insurance was good for run through switches, passing a positive red block without authority, train order and trainhandling violations etc.  Fighting, insubordination, RuleG usually not covered. If an engineer violated one of those rules, his fireman and head brakeman often times served time off of three to five months with him. I remember a fireman losing his job because his engineer passed a red signal at Omaha. This happened a couple months before Award 282 went into effect in either 63 or 64. He got back to work just prior to the 70 merger and probably as a claim settlement ahead of merger. Kenny Smith, Gen. Chairman BLFE never gave up his fight to get him back. The fireman retired a engineer a few years ago in Sioux City. He probably was not given consideration for return because Award 282 gave carrier the right to remove most firemen and some other rule changes.

Sent from my iPad

On Aug 20, 2012, at 8:41 PM, Rhonda <macon249@yahoo.com> wrote:

 

Yes, most rail insurance had exceptions. Generally they would not pay out for Rule G, which is drunk or just being a no show at work or theft. It is very easy to get discipline time off or be dismissed from service. It is just the way the railroad works. A lot of insurance was only good for once a year. We use to like to give them 5 or 10 days. They would have second thoughts about turning it in. I have even had guys ask for 60 days on an offense so they could draw and be off longer. They got paid anyway so why not.
Bill Jackson

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 20, 2012, at 9:26 PM, qutlx1@aol.com wrote:

 

Chuck,
 
Both the BRCF and the UTU had exclusions for rule G violations. It was one thing to make a mistake or be a victim of circumstances but the funds weren't going to pay for willful rule violations.
 
Leo Phillipp

This message cannot be displayed because of the way it is formatted. Ask the sender to send it again using a different format or email program. multipart/alternative



__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>