I was helped with this a few years ago, but unfortunately my brain misfiled the information and now I need help again.
Yardmaster, trainmaster. I do know that the names are pretty self-explanatory, but in general what does a yardmaster do and who reports to him.
Trainmaster - same thing. And does he work within the yard? I think I remember that sometimes they go on the road with a crew also.
Didn't there used to be a stationmaster - possibly now a station agent? There is more information out there on this job than most.
And a roadmaster - I know - this was a Buick!
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
In smaller towns, where only one man worked in a station, he was the stationmaster even if his title was "agent". In larger towns, such as Charlotte, the man in charge of the station and other employees was the stationmaster. I am not absolutely certain, but I think it was the stationmaster in Charlotte who called the trains so that the passengers would know that it was time to board. And, the stationmaster in Charlotte did not have the same accent as those in Atlanta, Birmingham, or New Orleans.
Johnny
I'm waiting with bated breath to hear some of the responses from the "rails". I think they're going to be interesting.
Norm
Mookie And a roadmaster - I know - this was a Buick!
Just for you, Norm... (Oh, yeah, and Mookie, too.)A yardmaster is a supervisor of yard crews, both operating and clerical (though he's an operating employee and there aren't many clerks left).A trainmaster is a supervisor of a region and the employees therein. He doesn'thave crews directly underneath him, but is there as a troubleshooter to ensure that things run as smoothly, as efficently, and as safely as possible.Now, add little things like quotas for efficiency tests, quotas for failed efficiency tests, and trainmasters can become troublemakers instead of troubleshooters. They forget that their job is to ake things run smoothly and efficiently, but begin to think that their job is purely to make their superiors happy (unfortunately, that's true in many cases). Neither position feels like he's the "master" of anything, because he's always "Mr. In-between".And neither one likes it at all when an informed employee would take them to task about choices they've made. Please don't ask how I know that.
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)
And a road foreman (of engines) is NOT a roadmaster, but occasionally is also a trainmaster.
(there were two places on the old DRGW where one person wore all three hats, but usually not very well)
-and the management model / titles is all 1860's-1880's US Military. Best there was at that time.
CShaveRR Just for you, Norm... (Oh, yeah, and Mookie, too.)A yardmaster is a supervisor of yard crews, both operating and clerical (though he's an operating employee and there aren't many clerks left).A trainmaster is a supervisor of a region and the employees therein. He doesn'thave crews directly underneath him, but is there as a troubleshooter to ensure that things run as smoothly, as efficently, and as safely as possible.Now, add little things like quotas for efficiency tests, quotas for failed efficiency tests, and trainmasters can become troublemakers instead of troubleshooters. They forget that their job is to ake things run smoothly and efficiently, but begin to think that their job is purely to make their superiors happy (unfortunately, that's true in many cases). Neither position feels like he's the "master" of anything, because he's always "Mr. In-between".And neither one likes it at all when an informed employee would take them to task about choices they've made. Please don't ask how I know that.
On most properties, Yardmasters are contract employees - just like the T&E and Clerical employees they supervise. Trainmasters are non-contract Officials of the company they are employed by.
In the olden days, it was desired to promote appropriate contract employees to become 1st level supervisors because of the knowledge they had acquired during their time spent in the contract positions. In today's world of railroading, contract experience among the non-contract officials is seen to be a detriment as they know too much about the BS that their superiors are shoveling at them + they can get better working conditions and more compensation by returning to their contract jobs. Today's railroads prefer to hire Trainmasters off the street so they can hold them hostage for their jobs as they have no contract positions to fall back on and no experience to know how badly they are being taken advantage of.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
MookieAnd a roadmaster - I know - this was a Buick!
I think the correct term was "roadmasher" wasn't it?
Chuck - this was a LOL moment for me - my very best girlfriend's dad was a conductor and his car was a Roadmaster. She managed to run into a wall at a local drive-in and rip off a door handle. She never did give me details of just exactly what he said, but I am sure it wasn't golly-gee....And looking back, I am so glad we had that car and not some of the little ones from today!
BaltACD CShaveRR Just for you, Norm... (Oh, yeah, and Mookie, too.)A yardmaster is a supervisor of yard crews, both operating and clerical (though he's an operating employee and there aren't many clerks left).A trainmaster is a supervisor of a region and the employees therein. He doesn'thave crews directly underneath him, but is there as a troubleshooter to ensure that things run as smoothly, as efficently, and as safely as possible.Now, add little things like quotas for efficiency tests, quotas for failed efficiency tests, and trainmasters can become troublemakers instead of troubleshooters. They forget that their job is to ake things run smoothly and efficiently, but begin to think that their job is purely to make their superiors happy (unfortunately, that's true in many cases). Neither position feels like he's the "master" of anything, because he's always "Mr. In-between".And neither one likes it at all when an informed employee would take them to task about choices they've made. Please don't ask how I know that. On most properties, Yardmasters are contract employees - just like the T&E and Clerical employees they supervise. Trainmasters are non-contract Officials of the company they are employed by. In the olden days, it was desired to promote appropriate contract employees to become 1st level supervisors because of the knowledge they had acquired during their time spent in the contract positions. In today's world of railroading, contract experience among the non-contract officials is seen to be a detriment as they know too much about the BS that their superiors are shoveling at them + they can get better working conditions and more compensation by returning to their contract jobs. Today's railroads prefer to hire Trainmasters off the street so they can hold them hostage for their jobs as they have no contract positions to fall back on and no experience to know how badly they are being taken advantage of.
A few who have looked into going over to the dark side that our company is now asking a person to give up their seniority in their old craft to be considered. One or two said they were told they would have to give it up.
Jeff
jeffhergert A few who have looked into going over to the dark side that our company is now asking a person to give up their seniority in their old craft to be considered. One or two said they were told they would have to give it up. Jeff
I don't doubt for a minute that has occured, but I can't think of a more effective way to insure the first level supervisory employees have no clue what is going on. I wonder if that idea is coming from middle level managers or corporate staff?
BaltACDOn most properties, Yardmasters are contract employees - just like the T&E and Clerical employees they supervise. Trainmasters are non-contract Officials of the company they are employed by. In the olden days, it was desired to promote appropriate contract employees to become 1st level supervisors because of the knowledge they had acquired during their time spent in the contract positions. In today's world of railroading, contract experience among the non-contract officials is seen to be a detriment as they know too much about the BS that their superiors are shoveling at them + they can get better working conditions and more compensation by returning to their contract jobs. Today's railroads prefer to hire Trainmasters off the street so they can hold them hostage for their jobs as they have no contract positions to fall back on and no experience to know how badly they are being taken advantage of.
That pattern is not exclusive to the rails; it is seen in many other industries and organizations, often to their detriment.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
jeffhergertA few who have looked into going over to the dark side that our company is now asking a person to give up their seniority in their old craft to be considered. One or two said they were told they would have to give it up. Jeff
Seems to be a pattern going around the industry where management doesn't want ANY employee (including non-contract) to have a fall back position. "My STUPID way or on the street you go, profitability be damned."
BaltACD Today's railroads prefer to hire Trainmasters off the street so they can hold them hostage for their jobs as they have no contract positions to fall back on and no experience to know how badly they are being taken advantage of.
Still doesn't work. They just quit. So instead of having someone go back to the ranks (and still contribute to the company) they are providing that initial experience for the college grads to use to get a job at a better company. Guess that's nice of them.
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
Within my area of responsibility over the past year at least 6 Trainmasters have 'moved on'. Either went back on their contract seniority, went to various short line operations or sought other employement. Can't keep up with the changes without a scorecard, and Division Management won't produce a scorecard (because I don't think they know when the next shoe will drop).
BaltACD Within my area of responsibility over the past year at least 6 Trainmasters have 'moved on'. Either went back on their contract seniority, went to various short line operations or sought other employement. Can't keep up with the changes without a scorecard, and Division Management won't produce a scorecard (because I don't think they know when the next shoe will drop).
Of course some folks on here would say welcome to the real world of capitalism, where there is no job security.
seppburgh2, that sounds as though it is from A Treasury of Railroad Folklore.
There are some gems in there, telling of middle management types who were hired off the street--such as the man who saw, while riding up and down, short lengths of rail with bent ends here and there and suggested that they be removed and put to good use after the ends were straightened. And there was the man, complete with yellow gloves and shades who was riding, on a branch, in a coach with a coal stove . He complained about the cold air in the coach, and was told that it was cold because the heater was at the rear of the car. His response was to order that the car be operated with the heater at the front--despite the fact that there was no way to turn the car at the end of the branch.
Jeff Hergert and Paul North may be able to quote some more examples.
Bobo probably outperformed all the other middle managers.
In another vein, a certain engine had been shopped and then was put out on the line. The engineer on the first run was having trouble getting the engine to run smoothly; the road foreman of engines was also on board, and when he saw the engineer's trouble, he put his crocheting down, went over, asked the engineer to get up, sat down, and tamed the engine. He had apparently come up from the ranks.
A Treasury of Railroad Folklore maybe where I read it first. Just Googled and located the story, along with other good side splitters, at:
http://www.spikesys.com/Trains/rr_jokes.html
Thanks, seppburgh2. I recognized a few of the anecdotes and enjoyed re-reading them--and enjoyed reading those that were new to me.
Deggesty man, complete with yellow gloves and shades who was riding, on a branch, in a coach with a coal stove . He complained about the cold air in the coach, and was told that it was cold because the heater was at the rear of the car. His response was to order that the car be operated with the heater at the front--despite the fact that there was no way to turn the car at the end of the branch. Jeff
man, complete with yellow gloves and shades who was riding, on a branch, in a coach with a coal stove . He complained about the cold air in the coach, and was told that it was cold because the heater was at the rear of the car. His response was to order that the car be operated with the heater at the front--despite the fact that there was no way to turn the car at the end of the branch.
DEG: Since we can assume that this was a dead end branch wouldn't going the other way would put the stove in front ?
blue streak 1 Deggesty man, complete with yellow gloves and shades who was riding, on a branch, in a coach with a coal stove . He complained about the cold air in the coach, and was told that it was cold because the heater was at the rear of the car. His response was to order that the car be operated with the heater at the front--despite the fact that there was no way to turn the car at the end of the branch. Jeff DEG: Since we can assume that this was a dead end branch wouldn't going the other way would put the stove in front ?
Remember the 'wrong side of the tracks'?
Stove in the front of the car would cause its smoke to trail over the car while it is moving. Shouldn't be 'that big' of a consideration, but it could be.
seppburgh2 A Treasury of Railroad Folklore maybe where I read it first. Just Googled and located the story, along with other good side splitters, at: http://www.spikesys.com/Trains/rr_jokes.html
The last story about the frozen chicken is alleged to have happened at Lockheed Burbank during L-1011 development and testing, due to an inexperienced test manager. Captured in super slo-mo Hulcher camera action.
ChuckCobleigh seppburgh2 A Treasury of Railroad Folklore maybe where I read it first. Just Googled and located the story, along with other good side splitters, at: http://www.spikesys.com/Trains/rr_jokes.html The last story about the frozen chicken is alleged to have happened at Lockheed Burbank during L-1011 development and testing, due to an inexperienced test manager. Captured in super slo-mo Hulcher camera action.
Oldies, but still good for a laugh.
I'll probably be too busy this year to try that stunt. Next year is a definite possibility, though. Worst they can do is throw me out, but it can be submitted in advance as a proposed resolution, which forces it to be considered at some level.
- Paul North.
Paul_D_North_Jr BaltACD Within my area of responsibility over the past year at least 6 Trainmasters have 'moved on'. Either went back on their contract seniority, went to various short line operations or sought other employement. Can't keep up with the changes without a scorecard, and Division Management won't produce a scorecard (because I don't think they know when the next shoe will drop). I have noted that, and am so tempted to ask that question from the floor at the next annual meeting of stockholders of the Class Is in which I own shares (includes CSX, NS, and CN). After all, the annual reports all say "employees are the most important assets of the company", so why is it that those assets are being wasted, lost (especially the training costs), and abused ? Failure to answer or to be able to answer that turnover question - especially if forewarned in advance by a letter to that effect - is pretty good evidence of management incompetence or neglect of the assets of the company, for which the management is supposed to be the trustees. Next question is why isn't it stated in the annual report, SEC 10-K, or reports to the FRA and STB ? Inexperience affects the safety of the operation too, another purported goal of the railroad and all of those organizations. I'll probably be too busy this year to try that stunt. Next year is a definite possibility, though. Worst they can do is throw me out, but it can be submitted in advance as a proposed resolution, which forces it to be considered at some level. - Paul North.
I have noted that, and am so tempted to ask that question from the floor at the next annual meeting of stockholders of the Class Is in which I own shares (includes CSX, NS, and CN). After all, the annual reports all say "employees are the most important assets of the company", so why is it that those assets are being wasted, lost (especially the training costs), and abused ? Failure to answer or to be able to answer that turnover question - especially if forewarned in advance by a letter to that effect - is pretty good evidence of management incompetence or neglect of the assets of the company, for which the management is supposed to be the trustees. Next question is why isn't it stated in the annual report, SEC 10-K, or reports to the FRA and STB ? Inexperience affects the safety of the operation too, another purported goal of the railroad and all of those organizations.
Just a personal thought as I have known several of our 'Ivory Tower' senior managers for approaching 30 years - years when they were lowly peeons (yes 2 e's).
They believe they aren't special didn't accrue any knowledge from their experiences and just morphed into their positions of power. With that being their percieved position - anybody hired off the street can do any position in the company - preferably without training, because training is expensive.
The reality is they are belitteling the efforts and experience that they had to put in to get in those positions as well as the efforts and experiences of those that now hold those intermediate positions. A sad state of affairs.
Paul and Balt: The question of promotion from the ranks of union/contract employees to various levels of management vs. direct entry to the management track post bachelors or MBA degrees is one that has concerned many corporations besides the rails. There are advantages and negatives to both policies. ~30 years ago, corporations like IBM, pre-break up AT&T and Sears, among others, used a hybrid approach. Management trainees were hired with a college degree minimum, but then spent several years gaining experience at lower levels so that they had at minimum some first-hand working knowledge of many sectors of their corporations. AFAIK that approach ended. It's a real shame to see the waste of internal resources that we see today.
schlimm Management trainees were hired with a college degree minimum, but then spent several years gaining experience at lower levels so that they had at minimum some first-hand working knowledge of many sectors of their corporations.
That would be beneficial to both the corportaion and the newly promoted individual. Knowledge of what you're going to supervise is invaluable assuming one is capable of handling the suprevisory position. I know of one track supervisor who was hired 'off-the-street'. He tried to learn all he could from the people under him but finally conceded defeat and took another position with the railroad.
Promoting from within but denying those individuals the right to keep their seniority in their craft and forfeiting their right to return to same prompts people to say 'no way'. Lose seniority rights, have nothing to fall back on, and if things go south you're out the door. Management wonders why people won't accept that? It ain't rocket science.
The 3 comments above are excellent and 'on-point', I believe.
In A Treasury of Railroad Folklore (Bodkin & Harlow, circa 1946, cited by Deggesty above), is the following observation: "As long as they keep promoting clerks to trainmasters, crews will have good jobs. It's the repetition" [of the operating pattern that is the crews' advantange].
BaltACD: That is a nuanced (not good) viewpoint - and a kind of "survivor" mentality - that I've not seen or heard of before. Reality today is that no one who is any good will put up with that long and type of meniality when there are so many other choices open to them (see many John Kneiling columns to the same effect). So longevity in a position per se is not necessarily a good quality (see below). Wonder what the 'turnover' rate is at those levels - avg. years service per person ?
Schlimm & Norm: "+1"
Norm: 1) Giving up seniority is required to prevent conflicts-of-interest between a supervisor and his union brothers. This is a common labor relations problem in almost any unionized business. 2) Supervisors come, and then they go, but the crews stay - and become real experts in all of the special local provisions of the union contracts regarding extra pay, scope of each "job" / crew assignment, etc.
3) When I first started working for a track construction/ maintenance business, I was intended to become essentially a Track Supervisor = Roadmaster. The 'old heads' told me it would take about 2 years to become familiar with the material side of the position (esp. rail sections and turnout components). They were right, too - mainly because our territory covered several different railroads: PRR, RDG, CNJ, LV, L&NE, DL&W, B&O, WM, and NYC, plus a bunch of shortlines, industrial plants, and military bases (67-1/2 lb. Russian rail, for example), etc.
More generally: How is the competence/ effectiveness of a trainmaster objectively and quantifiably standardized and evaluated ? (other than zero safety incidents that quarter or year). A lot is out of their control - traffic volume, weather, motive power and track conditions, crew availability, etc. But even if that could be taken into account - how does management tell the good ones from the bad ones ? Does it even care ? (though it should) An occasional poster here - Selector - used to evaluate officer candidates in and for one of the Canadian armed forces - maybe he has some insights.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.