Ass'n of Commuter Rail Emps. Local No. 9 v. Metro-N. Commuter R.R. Co.
| Decision Date | 25 April 2022 |
| Docket Number | 21-cv-5288 (LJL) |
| Citation | 600 F.Supp.3d 367 |
| Parties | ASSOCIATION OF COMMUTER RAIL EMPLOYEES LOCAL NO. 9, Plaintiff, v. METRO-NORTH COMMUTER RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Joshua John Ellison, Air Line Pilots Association, International, McLean, VA, Evan Hudson-Plush, Cohen, Weiss and Simon, New York, NY, for Plaintiff.
Erin Conroy, Rosanne Facchini, Neil Howard Abramson, Proskauer Rose LLP, New York, NY, for Defendant.
Defendant Metro-North Railroad Company ("MNR" or "Defendant") moves, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), to dismiss the complaint of plaintiff Association of Commuter Rail Employees Local No. 9 ("ACRE 9," the "Union," or "Plaintiff") for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Dkt. No. 16.
For the following reasons, the motion to dismiss is granted.
Plaintiff ACRE 9 is an unincorporated association and is the duly authorized bargaining representative for persons employed by MNR as locomotive engineers as defined by the Railway Labor Act ("RLA"), 45 U.S.C. § 151, Sixth. Dkt. No. 1 ("Complaint" or "Compl.") ¶ 10. MNR engages in the transportation of passengers by rail in interstate commerce and is a "carrier" as defined by the RLA. Id. ¶ 11; see also 45 U.S.C. § 151, First. Employees represented by ACRE 9 work at MNR. Compl. ¶ 11.
ACRE 9 has been the collective bargaining representative of MNR locomotive engineers since 2000. Id. ¶ 12. ACRE 9 and MNR are parties to a collective bargaining agreement ("CBA") that governs terms and conditions of employment for MNR locomotive engineers. Id. ¶ 13. The CBA is governed by the RLA, which governs labor relations in transportation industries including railroads. 45 U.S.C. § 151. The CBA became amendable pursuant to terms of the RLA on June 30, 2019. Compl. ¶ 13.
On February 26, 2020, ACRE 9 gave MNR notice that it intended to change its agreement with MNR, which would affect pay rates, rules, or working conditions and would also initiate a lengthy bargaining process under the RLA. Id. ¶ 14. ACRE 9 invoked the services of the National Mediation Board ("NMB") under the RLA. Id. Under the RLA, "the parties are obligated to maintain the ‘status quo,’ and the carrier may not make unilateral changes to rate of pay, rules, or working conditions until the extensive process of bargaining and mediation set forth in Sections 5 and 6 of the RLA is exhausted." Id. ¶ 15.
In the 1990s, MNR set out to implement a new time and attendance system called the Crew Management System ("CMS") after bargaining with employees’ predecessor union. Id. ¶ 16. The predecessor union and MNR entered into a letter agreement regarding CMS, which was incorporated into the CBA and has continued, unmodified, in all subsequent CBAs covering MNR locomotive engineers. Id. ¶¶ 16–17. Before CMS was implemented, the parties negotiated and agreed in a January 30, 1998 letter that, although engineers must "key in" at the beginning of their shift, they can "key out" at the end of the day or during the subsequent "key in" process. Id. ¶ 18. CMS has been used to track MNR locomotive engineers’ working hours since it was agreed to in 1999. Id. ¶ 16.
In 2019, the Chief Employee Relations and Administrative Officer of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority ("MTA")—MNR's parent company—laid out plans to use "Kronos biometric timeclocks" ("Kronos") at all locations where MNR locomotive engineers report to work. Id. ¶ 21. Unlike CMS, such a system would require MNR locomotive engineers to have their fingers biometrically scanned when they arrive at work for the day and also at the end of the work day. Id. ¶ 22. After ACRE 9 expressed concern that the new system would present privacy concerns and violate a New York law, MNR and the Union met on various occasions between August 2019 and September 2019 to discuss the implementation of Kronos. Id. ¶¶ 23–24. After the meetings, in response to questions drafted by the Union, MNR provided proposed responses that demonstrated that employees would be required to "swipe in" at the start of each shift and at the end of each shift at a Kronos clock. Id. ¶ 26. Additionally, the answers demonstrated that employees would be subject to discipline for late or missed swipes and that finger scanning would be required and would begin on September 18, 2019. Id. That same day, ACRE 9 filed suit to enjoin the implementation of the Kronos system. Id. ¶ 27.
In light of the lawsuit, MNR delayed implementing the Kronos fingerprinting and swipe-out requirements, as the parties worked to resolve their differences as part of the then-ongoing Section 6 negotiations, though MNR did implement a Kronos swipe-in requirement. Id. ¶ 28. The Section 6 negotiations resulted in a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") reached on December 20, 2019, which addressed a number of different issues and memorialized agreements with respect to the Kronos fingerprinting and swipe-out requirements. Id. ¶ 29.1 In Letter No. 5 to the MOU, "MNR stated that it would implement a ‘mobile timekeeping mechanism’ to allow locomotive engineers to ‘remotely swipe out.’ " Id. ¶ 30. According to Plaintiff, "A.C.R.E. committed to comply with that program when rolled out, and the parties agreed to meet to discuss any additional timekeeping requirements ‘prior to the implementation of mobile timekeeping.’ " Id. The MOU said "if there were ‘any change in the future with respect to Kronos timekeeping and its impact on either the terms of the collective bargaining agreement or compensation, the parties will meet to bargain those changes prior to the implementation.’ " Id. ¶ 32. In Letter No. 5, ACRE 9 agreed to withdraw the lawsuit it had initiated, and MNR agreed not to require fingerprinting until April 1, 2020 or until the New York State Department of Labor determined that it could impose such a requirement. Id. ¶ 33.
Around March 10, 2020, MNR announced it was delaying implementation of the Kronos fingerprinting requirement in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. Id. ¶ 35. A year later, on March 5, 2021, despite not having developed a mobile timekeeping mechanism, MNR announced that engineers must swipe out at the end of each day, effective April 12, 2021. Id. ¶ 36. The letter stated that "any employee who refuses to comply with the upgraded Kronos timekeeping program as directed will be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal." Id. ¶ 40. According to Plaintiff, MNR cited this Court's opinion in Sanzari v. Metro-North R.R. Co. , 2021 WL 467339 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2021), which addressed the swipe-out requirement for MNR conductors, and claimed MNR had discretion to implement this new requirement without bargaining with the Union. Compl. ¶ 37.
On March 18, 2021, ACRE 9 expressed its surprise that MNR "intended to unilaterally implement the swipe-out requirement" prior to implementing the mobile timekeeping system and to subject employees to disciplinary action for failing to comply despite what it claimed was the requirement in the MOU that it bargain such a change. Id. ¶ 42. MNR and the Union met on March 26, April 1, and April 9 to try to negotiate the policy, but MNR refused to change the swipe-out requirement and disciplinary policy. Id. ¶ 43. MNR issued a memorandum to all train and engine service employees on March 31, 2021, informing them of the swipe policy and stated that it was a "condition of employment at Metro-North." Id. ¶ 44.
The MOU required that MNR not use Kronos timekeeping for compensation purposes and, consistent with the MOU, MNR continues to track all hours for compensation purposes through CMS. Id. ¶¶ 46–47. The purported purpose of the Kronos swipe-out requirement for other MTA employees is to more carefully track overtime hours and pay. Id. ¶ 48. But Plaintiff claims that because engineers’ hours are highly regulated and they use other forms of overtime, which are not tracked with Kronos, the purpose of the swipe-out requirement is irrelevant to locomotive engineers. Id. ¶¶ 48–50. For example, engineers are subject to the Hours of Service Act, 49 U.S.C. §§ 21101 – 21109, which limits the number of hours an engineer can work and requires extensive recordkeeping; therefore, to comply with the recordkeeping requirements, MNR pre-populates an engineer's start and end times into CMS, which the engineer then certifies during the following tour of duty. Compl. ¶ 49. Also, engineer overtime is tracked without Kronos, and, for one type of overtime, it is calculated based on the scheduled and anticipated times of an assignment and not the time the engineer actually spends on the assignment. Id. ¶ 50. There are also other kinds of overtime with various tracking systems. See id. ¶¶ 51–52. Because of these systems, there is little ability for engineers to falsify their overtime hours. Id. ¶ 53. Therefore, Plaintiff contends, there is no reason to change the policy and require engineers to swipe out at the end of their shift until a mobile timekeeping mechanism is developed. Id. ¶ 55.
Plaintiff alleges that the swipe-out requirement harms the engineers because "the additional time spent at the end of their tour of duty in reaching an authorized time clock ... will result in more time spent at the engineer's final station and less time away from the work site." Id. ¶ 56; see also id. ¶¶ 57–58. With a mobile timekeeping system, engineers would be able to swipe out on their mobile devices at the end of the day instead of having to find a Kronos clock at a train station. Id. ¶ 59. Finding a Kronos clock could take nearly twenty minutes, possibly causing an engineer to miss their connecting train home, and then the engineer may have to wait nearly an hour for the next train. Id. ¶ 57.
Plaintiff brings this lawsuit seeking injunctive relief to prevent MNR from unilaterally implementing the Kronos swipe-out...
To continue reading
Request your trial