Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Well said by everyone. While it's a possibility, I concede the insider probability is somewhat low, compared to other things. I realized how horribly easy stuff like that still is, even post 9/11. We know it doesn't take much. But if this stuff is so easy, I wonder why terrorist activities haven't resurfaced sooner? I guess we can thank the Feds, although as I said, heavy-handed enforcement isn't helpful and borders on constitutional abuse. Part of the problem I have seen is how employees are treated by the company. I think it is possible to show a basic link between corporate behavior and employees who are being distracted from their jobs by militant management practices. I just think the vulnerabilities aren't always where people think they are, and we can't protect everything. Sooner or later it comes down to an issue of trust, knowing that you don't have to worry about dealing with the dangers of your job because you fear management retribution. The bare fact that these practices can exhibit a supreme form of paranoia is important because it demonstrates how-- in their rigor to protect all bases-- it creates bad management which simultaneously alienates good people. I remember working a yard where we saw some kids with a gun (it was a BB gun, or so we thought). Nobody reported it because we had other things to do, and the conductor felt it wasn't worth stirring up trouble. Security weaknesses from the inside can be traced to attitudes toward employees. The typical war between management and labor is counterproductive to the point of distraction, even to the point of not reporting possible problems due to the friction it would cause with management. I think this friction can be taken advantage of by people with bad motives, regardless of how that occurs-- even if it has to be from an outside vantage point via the unstable turnover of employees and the subsequent "churning" of up-to-date information. A lot of companies physically lock out access when a person leaves a job. They set up NDAs which have legal repercussions against leaking trade- secrets. A lot of companies would appear paranoid about protecting "proprietary information." I am wondering how railroads expect to protect their crews, if turnover allows newbies to become engineers in 6 months? It doesn't appear very smart to me to demand that people promote beyond their level of experience, or create incentives for new people to leave. And how many of us are always so wedded to our jobs that the money and working conditions aren't an issue? If the railroads can only keep people who are either highly-devoted to the job and are lucky to avoid problems, or those who can't find another job, then what does that do for all the guys who work for the RR and really hate it? I've met a lot of those who feel that way, and I think this is a common reaction to constantly have your human dignity offended. In other words, the people that really hate railroads are ordinary people who are burned-out and extremly fatigued. Some complaints are just the bluffing common to railroad-culture, but I have met other guys that really do hate everything about the companies. People who despise their job eventually stop caring about who they tell, and what is said. I guess that is a topic for another forum.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag