MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY
CANADIAN COUNCIL OF OPERATING UNIONS
THE BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS
UNITED TRANSPORTATION UNION
Consequent to our various discussions and subsequent meeting held at both Toronto Yard and the Spence Terminal facility on April 27, 2001 in regards to the application of portions of the Spence Terminal Facility Agreement, it is agreed:
1. In the application of the 2.0(a), the reference to not being able to switch any other customer(s) was included due to Managerial practices and policies that were in place at the time this agreement was originally negotiated. We have now mutually agreed that the need to clarify certain portions of this agreement, most specifically, what constitutes payment and when payment would apply for performing work other than that related to the Spence/Honda service requirements was in order.
2. It is agreed that, any of the assignments headquartered at Spence Terminal may switch or handle any traffic in the area known as the “ALLISTON BACK TRACK(s) ”. This is to include the servicing of any newly acquired customer that would be located at the “ALLISTON BACK TRACK(s) ” as presently designed, without the triggering of any form of extra compensation as outline in Item 2.0(d) and 2.0(e).
3. It is agreed that, cars handled specifically for the purpose of servicing the operating requirements of the Spence Pre-Trip Facility and/or Honda Alliston, and then rejected by Honda or it’s contracted loading personal, or deemed to be unsuitable by Honda or it’s contracted loading personal for loading, due to logistics, such as, but not limited to, a chain car in place of a chock equipped car, and said car(s) is subsequently rejected/retagged, that this will not be considered as "other than Honda traffic", and the penalty payment referred to in Items 2.0(d) and Item 2.0(e) would not apply.
4. It is agreed that, the Spence assignments arriving at Lambton Yard who are required to double over a portion of their train that does not fit into such yard track, because such yard track is being of insufficient in length to hold the entire train, in the event that a double is required to yard the train, the appropriate cut of cars, not just the overflow, will be doubled over, and, if in doing so, the crew is required to tie onto equipment other than Spence/Honda destined equipment, for any reason other than CROR Rule compliance, that the payment WOULD apply.
5. Any future dispute concerning the interpretation, application administration or alleged violation of this Agreement may be dealt with under the provisions of the grievance procedure of the parties Collective Agreement, or with the concurrence of all parties involved, an expedited “Grievance Resolution Process” may be instigated.
Signed at Toronto, this 27th day of April, 2001.
For Canadian Pacific
Manager Road Operations
Canadian Pacific Railway
For the Council
Local 416 District 3
United Transportation Union
Local Chairman Division 295
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers