U.S. Code » Title 45 » Chapter CHAPTER 16— REGIONAL RAIL REORGANIZATION › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER VII— PROTECTION OF EMPLOYEES

45 U.S.C. § 797e

Assignment of work

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 45 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) General

With respect to any craft or class of employees not covered by a collective bargaining agreement that provides for a process substantially equivalent to that provided for in this section, the Corporation shall have the right to assign, allocate, reassign, reallocate, and consolidate work formerly performed on the rail properties acquired pursuant to the provisions of this chapter from a railroad in reorganization to any location, facility, or position on its system if it does not remove such work from coverage of a collective bargaining agreement and does not infringe upon the existing classification of work rights of any craft or class of employees at the location or facility to which such work is assigned, allocated, reassigned, reallocated, or consolidated. Prior to the exercise of authority under this subsection, the Corporation shall negotiate an agreement with the representatives of the employees involved permitting such employees the right to follow their work.

(b) Expiration

The authority granted by this section shall apply only for as long as benefits are provided under this subchapter with funds made available under section 797l 11 See References in Text note below. of this title.

(Pub. L. 93–236, title VII, § 706, as added Pub. L. 97–35, title XI, § 1143(a), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 665.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 797l of this title, referred to in subsec. (b), was repealed by Pub. L. 99–509, title IV, § 4033(a)(2), Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1908, and a new section 797l of this title was subsequently added by Pub. L. 104–88, § 327(5).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1982–1990 · leading case: Local 194 C & T, United Transp. Union v. Consol. Rail Corp. & United Transp. Union, 672 F.2d 621 (7th Cir. 1982).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Local 194 C & T, United Transp. Union v. Consol. Rail Corp. & United Transp. Union, 672 F.2d 621 (7th Cir. 1982). · cites it 2× “See 45 U.S.C.A. §§ 797e, 797m (Supp. Dec. 1981).”
Div. No. 1, Detroit, Bhd. of Locomotive Engineers v. Consol. Rail Corp., 844 F.2d 1218 (6th Cir. 1988). “Conrail also asserts that its unilateral action was authorized by section 706 of the Regional Rail Reorganization Act of 1973, 45 U.S.C. § 797e (1982). Because we conclude that the unilateral change was arguably justified under the existing agreements, however, we need not…”
Bhd. of Locomotive Engineers v. Burlington N., Inc., 580 F. Supp. 797 (D. Colo. 1984). “2543 , now codified at 45 U.S.C. § 797e(g). In spite of its name, the Act dealt with a variety of matters, including an amendment to the hiring preference provisions of the Northeast Rail Service Act of 1981, a statute dealing with the disposition of Conrail, upon its failure.”
Consol. Rail Corp. v. United Transp. Union, 753 F. Supp. 1574 (Regl. Rail Reorg. Act 1990). “Section 706 of the Rail Act, 45 U.S.C. § 797e, was added by Section 1143(a) of NRSA, effective August 13, 1981.”
Beardsly v. Chicago & North W. Transp. Co., 836 F.2d 1493 (8th Cir. 1988). “On January 14, 1983, the arbitration provision of the Regional Rail Reorganization Act, 45 U.S.C. § 797e(g), was amended to subject disputes regarding the right of first hire under RITEA to mandatory arbitration.”
— 45 U.S.C. § 797e(g) — 2 cases
Bhd. of Locomotive Engineers v. Burlington N., Inc., 580 F. Supp. 797 (D. Colo. 1984). “2543 , now codified at 45 U.S.C. § 797e(g). In spite of its name, the Act dealt with a variety of matters, including an amendment to the hiring preference provisions of the Northeast Rail Service Act of 1981, a statute dealing with the disposition of Conrail, upon its failure.”
Beardsly v. Chicago & North W. Transp. Co., 836 F.2d 1493 (8th Cir. 1988). “On January 14, 1983, the arbitration provision of the Regional Rail Reorganization Act, 45 U.S.C. § 797e(g), was amended to subject disputes regarding the right of first hire under RITEA to mandatory arbitration.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.