PEPA 2011 Supervisor Talking Points

Transcription

1 PEPA 2011 Supervisor Talking Points Overview The Policy for Employee Performance Accountability (PEPA) has been updated, effective March 1, The update clarifies and simplifies portions of the policy and reflects several minor changes that have surfaced since the policy was last updated in July Nothing has changed in the core elements of the PEPA policy. The types of discipline categories, outcomes and review periods are all the same. Most of the changes shorten and simplify the language and reflect updates more consistent with Safety Participation and Safety Summit agreements. Most significant clarifications: References to the TY& E Attendance Guidelines have been removed (formerly Appendix D). This discipline handling will now be set out in the TY&E Attendance Guidelines (update issued March 1, 2011). The term alternative handling has been removed. Alternative handling is defined and outlined, by craft, in agreements with individual labor organizations; it is also available at departmental discretion where no agreement is in place. Reference to SIAP (Safety Incident Analysis Process) has been removed. SIAP is a type of alternative handling that is used only in very limited circumstances. Including it in the PEPA policy has been the subject of confusion. It is being removed to avoid the expectation to use this process in inappropriate circumstances. The term Standard violation, which has been commonly used for several years, is now officially reflected in the document, replacing the term Non-Serious. The lists of Serious and Dismissible offenses have been updated to reflect current handling: o o Serious rule violations (Appendix A) now specifically reference Engineering Critical Decisions, Mechanical Safety Absolutes, Transportation Deadly Decisions and Telecommunications Safety Essentials. Stand-alone Dismissible violations (Appendix B) now include failure to report accident or injury and multiple serious violations committed during the same tour of duty. Examples have been added to help supervisors understand and correctly apply review periods.

2 PEPA 2011 Frequently Asked Questions 1. Why is BNSF updating the PEPA policy? The PEPA policy has not been updated since July 1, The policy clarifications mostly shorten and simplify language or reflect changes in terms or process that have evolved over the past decade. 2. What are the major changes in the PEPA policy? The basic tenets and application of the policy are the same. The updates include the following: Deleted references to alternative handling because it is addressed in labor agreements with several labor organizations -- or at departmental discretion, in cases where no agreements exist Deleted references to TY&E Attendance Guidelines because a separate company policy addresses those requirements and related discipline Deleted references to SIAP, an infrequently used process and an item subject to confusion Use the term Standard violation instead of Non-Serious violation; the term Standard violation has been in common use for several years Added examples to help supervisors understand how to apply review periods Added references to Engineering Critical Decisions, Mechanical Safety Absolutes, Transportation Deadly Decisions and Telecommunications Safety Essentials in list of Serious rule violations (Appendix A) Added failure to report accident or injury and multiple serious violations committed during the same tour of duty to list of Stand-alone Dismissible violations (Appendix B) 3. Why has the term alternative handling been deleted from the policy? When the PEPA policy was first introduced in July 2000, alternative handling was a new concept. Since then, it has taken on various forms, including verbal coaching/counseling, written coaching/counseling, SIAP, supplemental training, etc. The term alternative handling has also been integrated and outlined in Safety Participation or Safety Summit agreements with most labor organizations. Where such agreements remain in effect, the terms of the agreements will continue to apply. In addition, alternative handling is available at individual departmental discretion and application where no agreement exists. Removing the reference in PEPA helps eliminate confusion based on these more current (and different) sources and applications. 4. Why has the Safety Incident Analysis Process (SIAP) been removed? SIAP is appropriate only in limited circumstances, and has been rarely used over the years. Its reference in PEPA has been the subject of confusion. It is being removed to avoid the expectation of using this process in inappropriate circumstances.

3 It is important to understand that SIAP was only one form of alternative handling. There are many others, including verbal coaching/counseling, written coaching/counseling, supplemental training, etc. These other forms of alternative handling may still exist, either by agreement or at each department s discretion. Notably, when SIAP was contained in PEPA, it was still discretionary. 5. BNSF has removed the Transportation attendance discipline handling from the PEPA policy. Where can supervisors find that information? References to the TY& E Attendance Guidelines have been removed (formerly Appendix D). The discipline handling, including the review period, is now set out in the revised TY&E Attendance Guidelines. 6. How does the Transportation Low Performance process relate to the PEPA policy? While the term Low Performance is new, the concept, process and expectations of full-time employment are not. BNSF expects train, yard and engine (TY&E) employees to be available for full-time employment. As a reminder, while a first Low Performance violation results in coaching and counseling, a second Low Performance violation is treated as a Serious rule violation. 7. Unauthorized absence is on the non-exhaustive list of Serious violations (Appendix A) and extended unauthorized absence is on the non-exhaustive list of Dismissible violations (Appendix B). Why was this changed from the previous version? The previous PEPA used the same term -- extended unauthorized absence -- to describe both a Serious offense and a Dismissible offense. In the previous PEPA, the Serious offense was described as follows: Extended unauthorized absence (as may be defined by labor agreements and applicable law). In the previous PEPA, the Dismissible offense was described as follows: Extended unauthorized absence; unauthorized absence beyond the period specified in self-terminating clause of applicable schedule agreement. The language in the previous PEPA was confusing, especially when applied to crafts whose collective bargaining agreements do not specifically define the term unauthorized absence. The updated language -- describing unauthorized absence as a Serious offense and extended unauthorized absence as a Dismissible offense more clearly indicates that the outcome depends, in large part, on the length of the unauthorized absence and more clearly articulates that the principle of away without official leave (AWOL) is applicable to all crafts.

4 8. The non-exhaustive list of Serious violations (Appendix A) now includes late reporting of accident or injury along with a notation about a 72-hour provision. Why the change? This is not a change, but it is a clarification that simply reflects the actual handling of such cases. For some time, BNSF has considered late reporting of an accident or injury as a Serious rule violation. The notation about the 72-hour provision is also not new; it was in the previous policy, and the application of the 72-hour provision will not change. If an employee experiences muscular aches and pains from routine work that do not appear to be serious when they first occur, the employee has 72 hours to notify his or her supervisor that an injury has occurred. Employees will not be disciplined for late reporting of this type of injury, as long as: They report the injury within 72 hours of the probable triggering event, and They notify the supervisor before seeking medical attention, and The medical attention verifies that the injury was most likely linked to the event specified. Examples of the types of muscular aches and pains addressed under the 72-hour provision include soreness in the shoulder that develops after shoveling snow all day, ankle pain experienced after walking, or pain in the back after bending over to pick up something when associated with on-duty activities. 9. The non-exhaustive list of Dismissible violations (Appendix B) now includes deferred adjudication. Why the change? There is no change in how PEPA is being applied. Under the previous policy as well as the updated PEPA, the focus is on the felony conduct itself, not on the magnitude of the sentence imposed. Individual states vary, and some states allow for deferred adjudication for certain types of felony conduct. The simple fact that an employee accepts a deferred, delayed or suspended sentence does not change the fact that the conduct was committed. 10. Is PEPA a negotiated agreement with the labor organizations? No, PEPA is a BNSF policy. It is not a negotiated agreement. 11. Why does BNSF have PEPA? As stated in the policy, it supports BNSF s vision of becoming injury- and accident-free by encouraging all employees to demonstrate safe work behaviors and ensure a safe work environment. The vast majority of BNSF employees reliably comply with the rules. PEPA provides a process to enforce BNSF and federal safety requirements for those employees who disregard BNSF rules, procedures and safety.

5 DRAFT BNSF News article, for posting Feb. 28, 2011 [Also for use on LR website, JLT website and BNSF-TV] Updated PEPA Takes Effect March 1 Tag: The updates clarify and simplify the Policy for Employee Performance Accountability (PEPA), which was last updated in July The Policy for Employee Performance Accountability (PEPA) has been updated, with changes effective March 1. As stated in the policy, PEPA supports BNSF s vision of becoming injury- and accident-free by encouraging all employees to demonstrate safe work behaviors and ensure a safe work environment. The vast majority of BNSF employees reliably comply with the rules. PEPA provides a process to enforce BNSF and federal safety requirements for those employees who disregard BNSF rules, procedures and safety. The updates clarify and simplify portions of the policy and reflect several minor changes made since the policy was last updated in July The updates also make the policy more consistent with Safety Participation and Safety Summit agreements. What was updated? No substantive changes were made. The types of discipline categories, outcomes and review periods are all the same. References to Train, Yard & Engine (TY&E) Attendance Guidelines, alternative handling and the Safety Incident Analysis Process (SIAP) were removed. The TY&E Attendance Guidelines outline discipline handling for attendance issues, including the review period, so those details are not necessary in PEPA. Alternative handling is defined and outlined in agreements with individual labor organizations; it is also available at departmental discretion where no agreement is in place. Removing the reference in PEPA helps eliminate confusion based on these more current (and different) sources and applications. SIAP, a type of alternative handling, was removed because it was used only in limited circumstances -- avoiding the expectation of using this process in inappropriate circumstances. The term Standard violation, commonly used, is now officially in the document, replacing the term Non-Serious. The lists of Serious and Dismissible offenses have been updated to reflect current handling. Examples have been added to clarify and explain certain points, and some other minor changes have been made. The updated policy can be viewed here [include link].