All of the major systems appear to be in hiring mode now for various reasons.. too many cuts due to PSR, baby boomer retirements, etc. But have railroads experienced a shortage of crews before or is this something new? I would imagine that during the world wars railroads lost many men to the war effort and that there would have been crew shortages, but I've never read anything about railroads being unable to provide services due to lack of crews. I remember a yardmaster telling me back in the 80s that they prefer to hire people who have family who already work for the railroad.. so if you're an applicant and check NO where they ask "Do you have any relatives who work for the railroad?" your chances go way down. I guess that's nolonger a concern these days.
UlrichAll of the major systems appear to be in hiring mode now for various reasons.. too many cuts due to PSR, baby boomer retirements, etc. But have railroads experienced a shortage of crews before or is this something new? I would imagine that during the world wars railroads lost many men to the war effort and that there would have been crew shortages, but I've never read anything about railroads being unable to provide services due to lack of crews. I remember a yardmaster telling me back in the 80s that they prefer to hire people who have family who already work for the railroad.. so if you're an applicant and check NO where they ask "Do you have any relatives who work for the railroad?" your chances go way down. I guess that's nolonger a concern these days.
Back in the day - railroads would adjust their T&E employment levels consistent with the rise and fall of business, hiring as necessary when necessary. During that period of time if the carriers laid off 100 people, when it came time to recall them 90 or more would answer the call and return to the carrier that had laid them off. Additionally the Hours of Service Law back in the day allowed for 16 hours on duty, allowed split service on 2 hours rest and only required 8 hours rest after the off duty time to be fully rested. The extra boards 'back in the day' for the most part weren't guaranteed and as such were staffed at a higher level than is being done today, thus there were more people on the boards to be called for any vacancy.
With the 21st Century PSR style operations, the boards are cut to the absolute minimum and routinely adjusted to keep them at the minimum level. The Hours of Service now limits working to 12 hours, with at least 4 hours rest to implement split service. Full rest reqires 10 hours UNDISTURBED rest before employes can be notified of a call to service (such a call is normally 2 hours before the new on duty time). Now a days when the carriers lay off people they are lucky if 20% of those laid off will answer the call and return to service, in many cases when they return to service they have to go through a period of retraining that means there is a period of time between them coming back to the carrier and being able to be used in service.
In the late 1970's the B&O's Baltimore Division lost track of their WW II hired Engineers that retired enmasse. At the time there was NO Engineer Training Program on the carrier. The emergency response was to order Road Foremen of Engines from all over the B&O/C&O system into Baltimore Terminal, thereby releasing Yard Engineers (not medically restricted) to operate in Road Service (where at one time or another they all had been qualified) and used the RFE's as Yard Engineers in the terminal. This kind of operation continued for almost a year until a Engineer's Training School had been created at Cumberland and the first graduates began showing up on the boards.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Didn't Union Pacific have a little bit of a meltdown about 15-20 years ago, when they instituted an early retirement program and underestimated how many people would go for it?
Other than that, crew shortages can happen when there is a spike in traffic. Often these are localized (such as CP / BNSF in the Bakken in 2014). It's unusual that the nationwide economy swings so wildly as it did in 2020 / 2021.
And once you're in a hole, it takes even more resources to dig yourself out. That's why hiring frenzies eventually end with newly-hired people getting furloughed - once things are back to normal, you suddenly have more people than you need to keep them going.
Dan
UP has had relatively periods of being caught short. They would get caught short, start hiring towards the end of the boom, and then hire too many. The result would be those completing their training would get furloughed. The next boom, the number coming back would be less and less of those recalled.
The biggest problem is we're losing experienced people we shouldn't be losing. Not because of retirements, they're just fed up with UP. Truth be told, I'm kicking myself for not going to the Iowa Interstate when I had a chance 20 years ago. They still hire, have openings now for four locations, but it's too late for me.
About having family already working. Some railroads would not hire close family members for the same craft on the same seniority district. The CNW was one such road. We had a father/son that the son had to work on a different district. Once UP took over, they didn't have, or no longer had, that prohibition. The son moved into the same district as dad.
We have and have had many cases of close family working on my district. One was a mother and son, until the son tore up a switch engine in a switching incident. A GP15 just doesn't look right with no front steps.
Jeff
One would think that treating people like human beings rather than commodities and avoiding the continual staff churn would result in a more efficient business. Instead, big corporations of all stripes want to solve the problem by cutting people out of the process entirely.
Psychot One would think that treating people like human beings rather than commodities and avoiding the continual staff churn would result in a more efficient business. Instead, big corporations of all stripes want to solve the problem by cutting people out of the process entirely.
Your thesis carried to the extreme
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYZti3dCQw4
Years ago I worked for a copper mine in Northern Manitoba that had a nice way of keeping enough staff on hand. When things slowed down they shifted people over to "bull gang"..where they would remain until things picked up again, and they would then resume their normal jobs in the smelter, fuming plant, or underground. One added perk was that we got to meet other employees from other areas that we might not otherwise have met. Bull gang consisted of miscellaneous mostly unskilled work, and one could find all kinds of people there.. miners, engineers, draftsmen, truck drivers..even managers. The company probably figured it was better to keep people minimally employed rather than to lay them off and risk losing them altogether. Maybe the same idea could work elsewhere.
Ulrich Years ago I worked for a copper mine in Northern Manitoba that had a nice way of keeping enough staff on hand. When things slowed down they shifted people over to "bull gang"..where they would remain until things picked up again.... The company probably figured it was better to keep people minimally employed rather than to lay them off and risk losing them altogether. Maybe the same idea could work elsewhere.
Years ago I worked for a copper mine in Northern Manitoba that had a nice way of keeping enough staff on hand. When things slowed down they shifted people over to "bull gang"..where they would remain until things picked up again.... The company probably figured it was better to keep people minimally employed rather than to lay them off and risk losing them altogether. Maybe the same idea could work elsewhere.
Would it be accurate to say that prospective employees for new hires in Northern Manitoba area would be limited? I'd guess that a furloughed associate would have to leave the area to find other employement, and that it would be difficult to bring them back or find a replacement.
Jeff nailed it.
There's always been times RRs were short on crews, but that was because of trouble finding people or getting people to stay after they hire on right away.
Today's troubles are people with 10-15-20+ years walking off the job (whether because of treatment, or because their jobs were eliminated/consolidated).
And there's a lot of people watching the contract process right now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
The crew shortage issue is perhaps also part of something bigger..an across the board shortage of people, for a number of reasons. I was chatting with a local taxi cab company owner the other day..he says he can't find drivers and had a couple of cabs sitting. I was surprised to hear that.. weren't cabbies going to be uberized out of existence a decade ago? Apparently not. Lots if job vacancies everywhere one cares to look.
Ulrich. Lots if job vacancies everywhere one cares to look.
How many of them pay decently? How many companies are treating their employees decently?
And before someone comes on and says "it's the railroad, that's how it's always been". No. It hasn't. And that's why we are where we are at wondering where the people are at.
CatFoodFlambe Ulrich Years ago I worked for a copper mine in Northern Manitoba that had a nice way of keeping enough staff on hand. When things slowed down they shifted people over to "bull gang"..where they would remain until things picked up again.... The company probably figured it was better to keep people minimally employed rather than to lay them off and risk losing them altogether. Maybe the same idea could work elsewhere. Would it be accurate to say that prospective employees for new hires in Northern Manitoba area would be limited? I'd guess that a furloughed associate would have to leave the area to find other employement, and that it would be difficult to bring them back or find a replacement.
That would be correct...but the company often had to hire from afar...and people who were let go would be younger and more inclined to leave. We had miners and mill workers from Peru and Chile as I recall, along with guys like me who were single and could move about easily. The biggest drawback of "bull gang" work is that sometimes we got to like it a little bit too much inspite of the cut in pay. Going from a brutal midnight shift in a copper smelter to running a lawn tractor on dayshift is a change that isn't hard to get used to, especially when the sandy beaches and beautiful ladies beckon..but just the same, the company had the right idea..keeping people on is better and probably cheaper than the hiring and layoff roller coaster..
zugmann Ulrich . Lots if job vacancies everywhere one cares to look. How many of them pay decently? How many companies are treating their employees decently? And before someone comes on and says "it's the railroad, that's how it's always been". No. It hasn't. And that's why we are where we are at wondering where the people are at.
Ulrich . Lots if job vacancies everywhere one cares to look.
I'm sure that's part of it..not all jobs pay well, and not all employers are good to work for.
UlrichI'm sure that's part of it..not all jobs pay well, and not all employers are good to work for.
And I believe current/younger generations are wanting the latter.
Railroads need to get out of the 1800s with their thinking.
ALL:
The Northern Pacific got rid of some fireman about 1962 due to a national directive. More engineers retired then they expected and two of them became clerks only to be called back before I started in 1966. The NP also hired additional firemen for passenger trains.
I called crews on the NP at Northtown in 1969 and the NP would not hire any switchmen so they would have any more protected switchmen before the 1970 merger. One Saturday I had no brakemen (I did have a conductor and engineer) for a local freight from Northtown Yard (Minneapolis) to Brainerd, MN and return. I told the trainmaster and two hours later two x-brakemen from Labor Relations showed up. Not much fun calling crews with one to call.
Ed Burn
Retired Clerk NP BN BNSF from Northtown.
NP EddieALL: The Northern Pacific got rid of some fireman about 1962 due to a national directive. More engineers retired then they expected and two of them became clerks only to be called back before I started in 1966. The NP also hired additional firemen for passenger trains. I called crews on the NP at Northtown in 1969 and the NP would not hire any switchmen so they would have any more protected switchmen before the 1970 merger. One Saturday I had no brakemen (I did have a conductor and engineer) for a local freight from Northtown Yard (Minneapolis) to Brainerd, MN and return. I told the trainmaster and two hours later two x-brakemen from Labor Relations showed up. Not much fun calling crews with one to call. Ed BurnRetired Clerk NP BN BNSF from Northtown.
Ed BurnRetired Clerk NP BN BNSF from Northtown.
In today's world of railroad labor relations - bringing 'officials' out of Labor Relations to fill craft vacancies would be a legitmate cause for a work stoppage.
zugmann Jeff nailed it. There's always been times RRs were short on crews, but that was because of trouble finding people or getting people to stay after they hire on right away. Today's troubles are people with 10-15-20+ years walking off the job (whether because of treatment, or because their jobs were eliminated/consolidated). And there's a lot of people watching the contract process right now.
I've heard the strike authorization ballots are in the mail.
I'm currently reading "Understanding the Railway Labor Act." It's going to be an interesting summer/early autumn.
It's not just railroads with shortage of crews, airlines are cancelling flights and even cancelling destinations because of crew shortage.
diningcar It's not just railroads with shortage of crews, airlines are cancelling flights and even cancelling destinations because of crew shortage.
And the Great Lakes freighters are also looking for people..
The hire and job interview process has been turned on its head. Both my kids have had multiple interviews and are now working at summer jobs that are pretty much tailored to what they want. And the interviews were more along the line of "so tell me why I should work here"..
Single crew five mile trains will fix everything!
rdamonSingle crew five mile trains will fix everything!
Sorrry - going from 5 man to 4 to 3 to 2 hasn't fixed the problem. Going to 1 won't fix it either. Not having people is not having people.
Even crewless trains require people to assemble them.
One point to consider is that the US workforce, people between 18 and 65 years old, is shrinking and has been since 2007. The Boomers are retiring and the number of young people turning 18 years old each year is falling. The potential workforce will continue to shrink until 2034 when the numbers will increase over the prior year. This does not mean it will reach 2007 levels, only that it will be higher than in 2033. This is happening in every developed country, in fact the US is in better shape than all other developed countries, as our fall will be slower.
JayBee One point to consider is that the US workforce, people between 18 and 65 years old, is shrinking and has been since 2007. The Boomers are retiring and the number of young people turning 18 years old each year is falling. The potential workforce will continue to shrink until 2034 when the numbers will increase over the prior year. This does not mean it will reach 2007 levels, only that it will be higher than in 2033. This is happening in every developed country, in fact the US is in better shape than all other developed countries, as our fall will be slower.
Perhaps employers and governments could provide incentives to keep workers on for another five or ten years. Obviously that would work less well for physically demanding professions, but there's no reason that accountants, teachers, equipment operators, salesmen etc couldn't work a few more years to take some pressure off of the baby boom exodus. A tax break for seniors maybe..
UlrichPerhaps employers and governments could provide incentives to keep workers on for another five or ten years. Obviously that would work less well for physically demanding professions, but there's no reason that accountants, teachers, equipment operators, salesmen etc couldn't work a few more years to take some pressure off of the baby boom exodus. A tax break for seniors maybe..
I think people are working longer. Forced retirements due to age are falling victim to age discrimination concerns. And people simply can't afford to retire, in no small part because a good many of them thought SS was a retirement program, not a safety net.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Ulrich JayBee One point to consider is that the US workforce, people between 18 and 65 years old, is shrinking and has been since 2007. The Boomers are retiring and the number of young people turning 18 years old each year is falling. The potential workforce will continue to shrink until 2034 when the numbers will increase over the prior year. This does not mean it will reach 2007 levels, only that it will be higher than in 2033. This is happening in every developed country, in fact the US is in better shape than all other developed countries, as our fall will be slower. Perhaps employers and governments could provide incentives to keep workers on for another five or ten years. Obviously that would work less well for physically demanding professions, but there's no reason that accountants, teachers, equipment operators, salesmen etc couldn't work a few more years to take some pressure off of the baby boom exodus. A tax break for seniors maybe..
Railroad Retirement allows full retirement benefits to employees age 60 or older with 30 years (360 months) service.
For my own reasons, I retired at 70 with over 51 years (500+ months). I got out just before PSR and moving my office from Baltimore back to Jacksonville.
I retired over 7 years ago. I'd probably still be working if the railroad were run better.
Allowing railroaders to collect Railroad Retirement at retirement age while still working for a railroad like Social Security allows might get some to stay longer or come back to work.
They've gotten creative during past periods of crew shortages. Jeff will probably remember the 'Canadian borrow outs' from 15 or 20 years ago, at the time UP was desperately short of employees and CN had too many so they worked out a loan of sorts.
CN's gone on binges of recruiting retirees to come back temporarily (we call them 'Surge employees') at least twice in the past 15 years. Relatively few answer the call and those that do are only supposed to be used when they run out of regular union guys, just like when managers work as engineers or conductors.
Management and clerical positions have been cut just like train crews, perhaps at an even faster rate. Using them also means that there is no one left to do their original job.
Contrary to what upper management and big shareholders believe, people are not infinitely replaceable.
And sure, a lot of older folks could continue working, but why should they? They won't get any special thanks (certainly not from management or the government) and don't they deserve to enjoy retirement when they planned to?
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
SD70DudeAnd sure, a lot of older folks could continue working, but why should they? They won't get any special thanks (certainly not from management or the government) and don't they deserve to enjoy retirement when they planned to?
I was always a fan of "30 and out" myself.
It's not like we have all the yard jobs and locals of years past. How many people are really going to want to stay past retirement working unassigned pool crap?
That was one of the reasons that I left. They did away with my assigned run.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.