Trains.com

Metra Conductor/Overtime pay

7796 views
37 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Thursday, November 20, 2014 4:20 PM

zugmann
 
Buslist
As I said I don't necessarily disagree with you. But of course management agreed to those terms with the blackmail of a strike. Of course the unions eliminated the possibility of management running through a strike by requiring licenses for certain operating positions (all my N&W friends had strike operating assignments prior to that). But beyond that get over what is past and let's talk about how to move forward!

 

 

A strike on the railroad would be squashed by court injuction (or whatever) in about 30 minutes.  There is no threat to management in that one.

And if the managers came up through the ranks, then the required certifications (put in place by the government, not the unions) wouldn't be an issue.  They'd already HAVE them.

If we don't follow our contracts, and we get pulled from service.  If the carriers don't follow the contracts, all we can do is put in a claim that'll be denied.  Just how it is.

 

Not to mention (but I will) that if the strike process is taken all the way, it is possible to have a contract imposed upon both parties.  A PEB, Presidential Emergency Board, composed of people picked by the POTUS, can recommend what a contract, or portions of a contract, should say if both sides can't agree on something.  The PEB's recommendations aren't binding by themselves, both sides can reject them.  That opens up the process to allow congress to vote a contract in or out, usually what the PEB recommendations are.  Although I believe congress can come up with their own "solutions," not just what the PEB recommends.  PEB descisions usually favor managment over labor, even when the PEB is picked by a Democrat.  

How would you like your pay, working conditions and fringe benefits (not to mention if your job is even retained-one man crews) decided by politicians?  Anymore, strikes are more a threat to labor than management.

Jeff

 

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Thursday, November 20, 2014 3:31 PM

Buslist
As I said I don't necessarily disagree with you. But of course management agreed to those terms with the blackmail of a strike. Of course the unions eliminated the possibility of management running through a strike by requiring licenses for certain operating positions (all my N&W friends had strike operating assignments prior to that). But beyond that get over what is past and let's talk about how to move forward!

 

A strike on the railroad would be squashed by court injuction (or whatever) in about 30 minutes.  There is no threat to management in that one.

And if the managers came up through the ranks, then the required certifications (put in place by the government, not the unions) wouldn't be an issue.  They'd already HAVE them.

If we don't follow our contracts we get pulled from service.  If the carriers don't follow the contracts all we can do is put in a claim that'll be denied.  Just how it is.

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Thursday, November 20, 2014 1:55 PM

BaltACD

Having lived on both side of the Management/Union divide - I stand by Management's exaggeration of 'Union Work Rules' - THAT MANAGEMENT AGREED TO IN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS.

Contracts apply to all parties that signed the contracts - Management and Union.

Everybody 'spins' situations to what they percieve to be their 'best PR' benefit - Management and Labor.

If 'Management' had their true beliefs, employees would pay the company for the opportunity to work - having to pay employees decreases the profits available to management bonus' and stockholder return.

Management has the belief that 'any idiot' off the street can do any job that Contract Labor can do, and most likely better (until they hire people off the street).  Labor, conversly, knows that Managment has been staffed with the off the street idiots.  I have been the idiot on both sides of the Labor/Management divide in my 49 year career.

The reality is the BOTH Labor and Management are needed to make the company operate and hopefully operate efficiently.  Remember Management is charged with making the plans for efficient operation - when labor performs the plans that managment designs in the manner that management intended and the plans fail, who is to blame.  You know what Managements answer is, even before the question gets asked.

Railroads live and die based upon their operating plans.  Plans that work have traffic moving fluidly across the network.  Plans that don't work end up in a congested network, where, if the carrier is lucky they will be able to handle yesterday's freight tomorrow or maybe the day after, all the while tieing up valuable resources of motive power and manpower.

 

 

As I said I don't necessarily disagree with you. But of course management agreed to those terms with the blackmail of a strike.  Of course the unions eliminated the possibility of management running through a strike by requiring licenses for certain operating positions (all my N&W friends had strike operating assignments prior to that). But beyond that get over what is past and let's talk about how to move forward!

 

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, November 20, 2014 1:40 PM

Having lived on both side of the Management/Union divide - I stand by Management's exaggeration of 'Union Work Rules' - THAT MANAGEMENT AGREED TO IN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS.

Contracts apply to all parties that signed the contracts - Management and Union.

Everybody 'spins' situations to what they percieve to be their 'best PR' benefit - Management and Labor.

If 'Management' had their true beliefs, employees would pay the company for the opportunity to work - having to pay employees decreases the profits available to management bonus' and stockholder return.

Management has the belief that 'any idiot' off the street can do any job that Contract Labor can do, and most likely better (until they hire people off the street).  Labor, conversly, knows that Managment has been staffed with the off the street idiots.  I have been the idiot on both sides of the Labor/Management divide in my 49 year career.

The reality is the BOTH Labor and Management are needed to make the company operate and hopefully operate efficiently.  Remember Management is charged with making the plans for efficient operation - when labor performs the plans that managment designs in the manner that management intended and the plans fail, who is to blame.  You know what Managements answer is, even before the question gets asked.

Railroads live and die based upon their operating plans.  Plans that work have traffic moving fluidly across the network.  Plans that don't work end up in a congested network, where, if the carrier is lucky they will be able to handle yesterday's freight tomorrow or maybe the day after, all the while tieing up valuable resources of motive power and manpower.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Thursday, November 20, 2014 12:22 PM

Buslist

I don't disagree with you at all except for you emotional 1% comment. Let's face it the union mentality to protect their craft in the face of advanced technology held the industry back for years, it wasn't only over regulation.  The industry would probably be gone or nationalized today if it wasn't rationalized. So get off the 1% thing.

 

 
  Having done union work the union has a legal responsibility to defend any management action against a member.  We had a Captain the did a very bad thing that cost a passenger his life.  But union still had to defend him.  Got quite a lot of time off but finally reinstated by arbitrator.
All other employees hoped he would get canned including yours truly.
  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Thursday, November 20, 2014 12:15 PM

BaltACD

 

 

 

  

Considering how we've gone from 5 person crews to 2, extended crew districts to reflect more reasonable work times, closed a lot of operator/agent offices, mechinized MOW etc. I'd say it was a lot more than 1%.

 

 

 

Technological advancement in MofW, computers, hardware and communications form the bulk of the jobs that no longer exist - not 'featherbeding'.  Part of the problem the carriers are presently trying to work their way through is the lack of trained personnel to step into needed positions of Conductor and Engineer - positions that in days gone by had apprentice personnel in the form of brakemen and firemen already on the property learning their craft.  Now if you need Engineers you hire someone off the street process them through training to be able to work as a Conductor/Brakeman for a year or so and then force them into Engineer Training where they relinquish their Conductor/Brakeman Seniority and are school taught the basics of locomotive mechanical, electrical and air brake operation that has to cover the wide variety of locomotives today's Class 1 carriers utilize - both EMD and GE as well as any orphans that may exist on a property.  After passing the classroom education they are then put out in the field as Engineer Trainees on the territory where they will establish their seniority.  After a indeterminate period of time, being taught by current engineers they will have a test ride with a Road Foreman of Engines and either become a qualified Engineer or require more OJT training or a determination that they will never be a Engineer and given their exit interview from the company.  From the determination of need to having a qualified engineer you are talking nearly two years.

 

 

 

 

I don't disagree with you at all except for you emotional 1% comment. Let's face it the union mentality to protect their craft in the face of advanced technology held the industry back for years, it wasn't only over regulation.  The industry would probably be gone or nationalized today if it wasn't rationalized. So get off the 1% thing.

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Thursday, November 20, 2014 12:13 PM

Buslist

 

 

 

Remember that was the union position when the the IC proposed a slimed down low cost (prior to dereg) operation on the Iowa Devision. IIRC the IC wanted 2 man crews and extended crew districts to divert traffic from the CNW. The Unions shot it down.

Your unintentonal spelling error here might be an accurate portrayal, after all.  Back then, two-man crews wouldn't have cut it.  Much has been done technologically to make them more palatable.  Yet there times when these crews, which look so good on paper, are faced with superhuman challenges just to get their trains over the road.  Oh, they earn their money, all right.

And thank you, Jay, for bringing reality into play.  In my employment days, I took the overtime when I was stuck with it, but never really volunteered for more than an eight-hour day.  There are a few "Twelve and tow, or we don't go" folks out there, but I suspect that the closest thing they have to a family is probably the bar owner and the barmaid.

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:46 AM

Balt, about how long did a fireman or brakeman work before being promoted? I know some never took promotion--I knew a few flagmen who were getting along in years.

Johnny

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, November 20, 2014 9:50 AM

Buslist
 
BaltACD

 

 
Buslist
 

Wasn't the accepted term for that called "feather bedding"?

 

 

In some management circles that was the term.  However, when it comes to management citing examples - they only cite the one out of a hundred that proves their point - not the other 99 that don't. 

  

Considering how we've gone from 5 person crews to 2, extended crew districts to reflect more reasonable work times, closed a lot of operator/agent offices, mechinized MOW etc. I'd say it was a lot more than 1%.

 

Technological advancement in MofW, computers, hardware and communications form the bulk of the jobs that no longer exist - not 'featherbeding'.  Part of the problem the carriers are presently trying to work their way through is the lack of trained personnel to step into needed positions of Conductor and Engineer - positions that in days gone by had apprentice personnel in the form of brakemen and firemen already on the property learning their craft.  Now if you need Engineers you hire someone off the street process them through training to be able to work as a Conductor/Brakeman for a year or so and then force them into Engineer Training where they relinquish their Conductor/Brakeman Seniority and are school taught the basics of locomotive mechanical, electrical and air brake operation that has to cover the wide variety of locomotives today's Class 1 carriers utilize - both EMD and GE as well as any orphans that may exist on a property.  After passing the classroom education they are then put out in the field as Engineer Trainees on the territory where they will establish their seniority.  After a indeterminate period of time, being taught by current engineers they will have a test ride with a Road Foreman of Engines and either become a qualified Engineer or require more OJT training or a determination that they will never be a Engineer and given their exit interview from the company.  From the determination of need to having a qualified engineer you are talking nearly two years.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Thursday, November 20, 2014 9:39 AM

But unions can only do so much.  They don't do the hiring or firing. And since a crew can perform service up to 12 hours (with no 4 hour break) - it almost seems expected that they will work to the last minute.  From personal observations locally, the older guys were the ones that wanted all the overtime.  Attitudes have shifted the last couple of years, though.  Most of the newer guys are completely happy with working just 8 and would love for that to be the norm.  But the railroad has other plans.

Maybe that's why they still have trouble finding people to stay with this line of work.

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Thursday, November 20, 2014 8:57 AM

jeaton

A Metra T&E employee making a $100,000 a year would pay about $27,000 total for Railroad Retirement, Medicare and Illinois and federal income tax.  The total tax rate on the income above $100,000 would typically be 42%. While the amount left after tax can be enough to provide a comfortable living, costs in the Chicago area aren't going to leave enough left to make the person rich.

 

 

Thanks for a reality check!

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Rockton, IL
  • 4,821 posts
Posted by jeaton on Thursday, November 20, 2014 8:43 AM

A Metra T&E employee making a $100,000 a year would pay about $27,000 total for Railroad Retirement, Medicare and Illinois and federal income tax.  The total tax rate on the income above $100,000 would typically be 42%. While the amount left after tax can be enough to provide a comfortable living, costs in the Chicago area aren't going to leave enough left to make the person rich.

"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Thursday, November 20, 2014 8:37 AM

schlimm

Union members in an earlier time were not only concerned with their own pay, but also with protecting or increasing the number of jobsin the craft.   In this case there could be more jobs if engineers worked 8 hour shifts without all the bizarre (and apparently antiquated) conditions that lead to so much more time on the clock.   But that value is also lost.

 

 

Remember that was the union position when the the IC proposed a slimed down low cost (prior to dereg) operation on the Iowa Devision. IIRC the IC wanted 2 man crews and extended crew districts to divert traffic from the CNW. The Unions shot it down, how might the traffic map be different if it was accepted?

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Thursday, November 20, 2014 7:26 AM

BaltACD

 

 
Buslist
 

Wasn't the accepted term for that called "feather bedding"?

 

 

In some management circles that was the term.  However, when it comes to management citing examples - they only cite the one out of a hundred that proves their point - not the other 99 that don't. 

 

 

Considering how we've gone from 5 person crews to 2, extended crew districts to reflect more reasonable work times, closed a lot of operator/agent offices, mechinized MOW etc. I'd say it was a lot more than 1%.

  • Member since
    October 2014
  • From: Flint or Grand Rapids, Mi or Elkhart, It Depends on the day
  • 573 posts
Posted by BOB WITHORN on Thursday, November 20, 2014 7:10 AM

[quote user="BaltACD"]

 

 
Buslist
 

Wasn't the accepted term for that called "feather bedding"?

 

 

In some management circles that was the term.  However, when it comes to management citing examples - they only cite the one out of a hundred that proves their point - not the other 99 that don't. 

 

As does Union mgmt. Cherry pick the points that help and ignore the rest.

 

Working 8 hours would increase employment, but wouldn't it also increase benefit & retirement expenses? Paying for extra hours would seem to be cheaper

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, November 20, 2014 6:43 AM

Buslist
 

Wasn't the accepted term for that called "feather bedding"?

In some management circles that was the term.  However, when it comes to management citing examples - they only cite the one out of a hundred that proves their point - not the other 99 that don't. 

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 10:09 PM

schlimm

Union members in an earlier time were not only concerned with their own pay, but also with protecting or increasing the number of jobsin the craft.   In this case there could be more jobs if engineers worked 8 hour shifts without all the bizarre (and apparently antiquated) conditions that lead to so much more time on the clock.   But that value is also lost.

 

 

Wasn't the accepted term for that called "feather bedding"?

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 9:52 PM

Union members in an earlier time were not only concerned with their own pay, but also with protecting or increasing the number of jobsin the craft.   In this case there could be more jobs if engineers worked 8 hour shifts without all the bizarre (and apparently antiquated) conditions that lead to so much more time on the clock.   But that value is also lost.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 9:47 PM

alphas

I think the one item that isn't being discussed in regards to this topic is retirement.   I suspect that the more senior the conductor or engineer, the more overtime they may be taking.    Normally, doing so nearer the end of one's career builds the retirement up dramatically.    I can't say for sure since I don't know how the METRA retirement works although I presume it is a defined benefit type.   However, I have heard that the public pension funds in IL are the most underfunded in the USA so anything that makes their deficit worse should be an "no-no".

 

 

 

METRA employees are covered under Railroad Retirement which is similar to but more robust than Social Security. Like SS it has a maximum annual creditable earning limit (subject to with holdings). This is a national plan and is reported to be financially sound. So no, working overtime does you no good once you hit the limit of annual earnings with this program, and it has nothing to do with the Illinois pension issue since its a national program. It's long term viability is in danger however as the Paul Ryan budget proposes to raid it. (Some railroad employees around here have uttered the s word if that comes to pass but we'll see).

 

METRA employees may also have a supplementel pension ( I guarantee you their brothers and sisters over on the BNSF and UP do, but then if you work for a government entity you don't deserve it) which may or may not have an earning cap and may or may not be in the Illinois pension mess.

 

I would be interested to know if supplemental pension funds were transferred to METRA for affected employees when METRA purchased the lines they now own, or do those folks still belong to the predecessor road's pension program.

 

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 8:47 PM

Watching 'You Only Live Twice' on BBC America - Blofeld asking for a 'ransome' of $100,000,000 - seemed like a lot of money in 1965 - in the world of multi Billion dollar business deals of 2014 it sounds like chump change.

$100,000 in 2014 is not what it was 10 years ago, 20 years ago or 30 years ago - especially after the tax men get their shares and one is lucky if they can clear $70K

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 7:59 PM

There is nothing wrong with the pay that these railroaders are earning.  

Keep in mind by whom these newspapers are owned, whom they endorsed for governor of Illinois, and his promises to take down labor "like Reagan did with the Air Traffic Controllers".  

If this is too political, please disrgard and/or pull it.  But I fear that this is just the opening volley in a battle against labor in the public sector.  

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • 9,265 posts
Posted by edblysard on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 7:17 PM
I wonder why the author is upset with the earnings.
After all, a plant operator down here in one of the refineries can make that as an annual salary easily.
Most of the guys on the PTRA extra board make more than that.
The guy one notch below me had his railroad retirement statement out, he was trying to figure out a question he had, and we looked, in 17 years, working an overtime job most of the time, he earned 2.5 million.
This kid works 10 hours a shift minimum, on a night job, so he really earned it.
I can’t imagine having to work a split shift for 16 hours daily; there would be no personal life at all.
 

23 17 46 11

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 5:49 PM

alphas
As for the one poster who compares working in a Mickey D's in the US to Austria, the employer's expenses for non-payroll employee expenses are a lot less in Austria which has the government providing the "mandated "benefits" that in the US are provided by the employer.   I'n not sure that a valid comparison of wages is applicable unless that and also what the average worker pays in taxes to support the welfare state are also factored into the equation. 

1.  Company-paid-for employee health benefits at McDonald's USA for the average worker?   Not much, if any, since most workers are part-time..

2. The statement was about Australia, not Austria.   Australia has a complex combination of government and private insurance.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 3:02 PM

zugmann
 
schlimm

They also are paid to take a required four hours off during shifts of more than 12 hours — a common occurrence for those working two rush hours.  

 

 

 

 

Why wouldn't they get paid?  They are working a split shift, and from what I understand with the respite laws, can be on duty for up to 16 hours.   It's not like they are at home drinking beer. 

 

Are they going to stop paying us when we blow up and have to wait 4+ hours for our taxi to find us?  

 

Not to mention Held Away (aka, detention pay, hostage pay, and probably other terms more region or railroad specific) for being in the motel for over 16 hours.  

Jeff

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • 575 posts
Posted by alphas on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 1:54 PM

I think the one item that isn't being discussed in regards to this topic is retirement.   I suspect that the more senior the conductor or engineer, the more overtime they may be taking.    Normally, doing so nearer the end of one's career builds the retirement up dramatically.    I can't say for sure since I don't know how the METRA retirement works although I presume it is a defined benefit type.   However, I have heard that the public pension funds in IL are the most underfunded in the USA so anything that makes their deficit worse should be an "no-no".

As for the one poster who compares working in a Mickey D's in the US to Austria, the employer's expenses for non-payroll employee expenses are a lot less in Austria which has the government providing the "mandated "benefits" that in the US are provided by the employer.   I'n not sure that a valid comparison of wages is applicable unless that and also what the average worker pays in taxes to support the welfare state are also factored into the equation. 

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 1:50 PM

schlimm

They also are paid to take a required four hours off during shifts of more than 12 hours — a common occurrence for those working two rush hours.  

 

 

Why wouldn't they get paid?  They are working a split shift, and from what I understand with the respite laws, can be on duty for up to 16 hours.   It's not like they are at home drinking beer. 

 

Are they going to stop paying us when we blow up and have to wait 4+ hours for our taxi to find us?  

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 1:47 PM

The alternative is to pay them two complete days.  Men don't work for free.  The Hours of Service law permits a 4 hour or more and less than 10 hour break in service in working within the 12 hours of the permitted work day.  These breaks in service are compensated.  If the individuals were to conclude their service with the end of their morning run.  They would have to have 10 hours undistrubed rest before starting another compensated day to make the return trip.  When train and engine crews go on duty, they are on pay until they are finally released from service.  This applies to freight crews as well as passenger crews, in certain situations the 4 hour plus respite happens with freight crews.

I behoves the carriers to use ALL of the 12 Hours allowed by the Hours of Service Law in order to minimize the employee head count.  To a point, it is much cheaper to pay employees that are already on the payroll to perform all the service you are able to give them, rather than hire additional personnel to perform this service.  Fringe Benefit payments accrew on head count, not on service hours.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 1:28 PM

They also are paid to take a required four hours off during shifts of more than 12 hours — a common occurrence for those working two rush hours.  

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, November 19, 2014 12:55 PM

zugmann

I love this:

 

“It’s outrageous that riders are going to be paying for this level of salary when riders are not guaranteed those kind of pay schedules or those kind of work rules or additional compensation,” Robling said.

 

 

 

Wait... WHAT?  In what twisted world does Robling think we live in where you are paid/schedueld solely based on what your customers are paid?  Guess what... many of those commuters work M-F, 8 hours per day.  So I guess that is all the Metra workers should have to work.  Only fair.

 

Sounds like Robling is a little mad that he was a 'communciations director' that got paid less than a conductor.

 

 

 

$Envy - pure & simple.  However, if he were requested to put in the hours that those whose compensation he envys did to earn that compensation - he would be long, long gone.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy