A wrongfully-terminated BLET member received more than $184,000 in back pay after the BLET got him his job back, and he was awarded an additional $150,000 in punitive damages after a federal whistleblower investigation found that the Union Pacific Railroad violated the Federal Railroad Safety Act by terminating him after he reported and sought medical care for a work-related injury.
In May, the BLET’s UP-Southern Region General Committee of Adjustment secured the engineer’s reinstatement with full back pay under the grievance process. The BLET also helped guide the member in filing a claim under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rail worker whistleblower protection program. Not only did OSHA reiterate the engineer’s reinstatement, it further ordered Union Pacific to pay interest on his back pay wages, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorney’s fees. Combined, the award totaled over $350,000.
That amount breaks down as follows: The BLET secured $184,869.60 in back pay, while the OSHA ruling ordered the following: $10,428.41 in interest on his back pay; $10,000 in compensatory damages for pain and suffering; and $150,000 in punitive damages for “reckless or callous disregard” of the engineer’s rights. UP was ordered to expunge the engineer’s employment records, restore all benefits, leave time, and seniority status. UP was further ordered not to retaliate against the engineer.
On February 1, 2024, the engineer and a co-worker (“Employee #2″) were passengers in the backseat of an Uber rideshare vehicle while being transported to the Strang Yard facility in La Porte, Texas, when their Uber was rear-ended by a pickup truck. Both railroaders reported pain and discomfort in the neck and lower back. A UP manager questioned the Uber driver who described the impact as a “small bump.” The engineer obtained medical treatment for his injuries from a physician after going off duty that same day (a prescription for a muscle relaxer and x-rays), but Employee #2 did not. Upon returning to work on February 8, 2024, the engineer completed a “Report of Personal Injury or Occupational Illness” report. The next day, UP management charged him with “dishonesty,” claiming that he “falsely reported an on-duty injury.” UP terminated his employment on March 15, 2024.
“OSHA finds that (the engineer’s) protected activities were a contributing factor for (Union Pacific’s) disciplinary actions, in part, because (he) sought medical attention — resulting in an FRA reportable injury — and was punished for doing so, while Employee #2, who did not seek medical attention, did not experience an adverse action.”
In its findings, OSHA highlighted that the railroad provides financial incentives to managers to reduce the number of injuries reported by employees by linking management compensation to the number of reported injuries. More reported injuries leads to negative consequences for the manager. “The fact that (Union Pacific’s) official policy connects the number of reported injuries to the manager’s performance evaluation clearly gives the manager an incentive to discourage the reporting of injuries,” according to OSHA’s determination.
• More information about whistleblower protections for rail workers can be found here.
• An OSHA Fact Sheet (PDF) regarding whistleblower protections for rail workers can be found here (PDF).
Photo by Cory Rusch, BLET Division 659