Does "Common Carrier law" still apply to railroads?

[bobwilcox]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Clevelandrocks

Tariffs have mostly gone away with deregulation and contracts between the carriers and shippers are the new way to conduct business.

What changed so that diifrent shippers pay diffrent rates to move the same stuff the the same places

Tariffs are still frequently used in lumber, grain, etc. The Staggers Act 24 years ago alowed contracts for the first time since 1906

[Anonymous]

Tariffs have mostly gone away with deregulation and contracts between the carriers and shippers are the new way to conduct business. These are private documents so no one else knows what any other shipper is paying to move their freight. You have to negotiate the best rate you can and then decide if it is worth it to ship via rail.----------

Yes but when is the railroad required to publi***he tarrif. Example RR museum want to move a caboose on XYZ railroad. XYZ Railroad has never moved a caboose so RR Museum and XYZ comes up with a contract. But Under ol ICC rules the RR has to publi***he tarrif. What changed so that diifrent shippers pay diffrent rates to move the same stuff the the same places

[bobwilcox]

QUOTE: Originally posted by mudchicken

(1) The provisions are all outcomes of the Elkins Act. Still very much in effect.

(2) Trying to mold the law to suit your premise does NOT fly.

440, arbfbe, CSS and bobwilcox are dead - on!

[banghead][banghead][banghead]

These rules fall away if the railroad and the shipper have a rate contract.

[mudchicken]

(1) The provisions are all outcomes of the Elkins Act. Still very much in effect.

(2) Trying to mold the law to suit your premise does NOT fly.

440, arbfbe, CSS and bobwilcox are dead - on!

[banghead][banghead][banghead]

[arbfbe]

Read the text over one more time. No where does it say that all railroads must charge the same. It plainly says the railroad may not charge more or less than the published tariff for that service. Thus shippers will know what they will be charged before loading their freight for shipment on that particular railroad. They are also assured that all of their competitors will be paying the same amount for the service they are so they are not at a disadvantage. Tariffs have mostly gone away with deregulation and contracts between the carriers and shippers are the new way to conduct business. These are private documents so no one else knows what any other shipper is paying to move their freight. You have to negotiate the best rate you can and then decide if it is worth it to ship via rail.

[bobwilcox]

Freight tariffs and this statue are just about buying transportation, not other transactions a railroad enters into such a land sales, trackage rights, etc.

[greyhounds]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Clevelandrocks

Well perhaps they should be! Are not trackage rights in the tarrifs for freight moves?

I never, ever saw trackage rights charges in a freight tariff.

[TH&B]

Whay should they be? Not all tracks cost the same to maintain and operate.

[Anonymous]

Well perhaps they should be! Are not trackage rights in the tarrifs for freight moves?

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Trackage rights agreements are not listed in the tariffs and are contracts which are agreed upon by the parties involved. They are not universal, the trackage rights fees paid by NICTD for use of the Metra Electric District between Kensington and Randolph Street are not the same as those for Metra on the Illinois Central between 21st Street and Joliet.

[Anonymous]

So.....Would this apply to Citys that want to start commuter rail lines in that if Dallas wanted to start a new line they would have to be charged the same track access fees that Chicago Metra is being charged?

[Anonymous]

15. Before OSRA, sections 10(b)(1) and 10(b)(3) of the 1984 Act stated:

No common carrier, either alone or in conjunction with any other person, directly or indirectly, may-(1) charge, demand, collect, or receive greater, less, or different compensation for the transportation of property or for any service in connection therewith than the rates and charges that are shown in its tariffs or service contracts;

* * *

(3) extend or deny to any person any privilege, concession, equipment, or facility except in accordance with its tariffs or service contracts.