These people who want a quick return on their investments make me think of robber baronets--and the people in the Germanies a few centuries ago who preyed on defenceless people passing through their territory.
Johnny
I am just speculating now -
Michael Ward (and the Credit Default Swap Recession and Hedge Fund Collapse) faught 'The Childrens Fund' attack on CSX in 2007/08 - and the Board were ambivalent. When Mantle Ridge came around with the intent in placing EHH in position to rape all the financial security out of CSX, I suspect MW said the hell with it, you (the board) didn't appreciate the danger that CSX dodged in The Children's Fund's financial collapse upon getting the seats they desired, so now you can deal with Mantle Ridge and EHH - I'm out of here, with my golden parachute and retirement. Thanks for nothing!
Company political tea leaf reading is a rather murkey affair!
CSX will be a financially crippled shell of itself when Mantle Ridge lets the corpse free.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
tree68 Shadow the Cats owner If possible the board of directors needs to order a full mental workup on Harrison before allowing him to implement his plans anymore. The people controlling EHH, if you will, are only looking at one thing - the return on their investment. And the sooner, the better. Minutiea like efficiency, safety, what-have-you, are of little concern to them. Only the bottom line. Note also in the article that EHH has also done some other financial sleight of hand tricks at CSX, changing the accounting classification of several items in such a way that they enhance the bottom line, while not actually changing anything. As for getting rid of your boss's entire drop and hook operation - all you need to account for is the reduction of costs it would engender - no more maintenance, no manpower or fuel costs to do the drops and pickups, etc. We won't worry about the loss of income until it happens... By then the in-it-for-the-money investors will have cashed out.
Shadow the Cats owner If possible the board of directors needs to order a full mental workup on Harrison before allowing him to implement his plans anymore.
The people controlling EHH, if you will, are only looking at one thing - the return on their investment. And the sooner, the better. Minutiea like efficiency, safety, what-have-you, are of little concern to them. Only the bottom line.
Note also in the article that EHH has also done some other financial sleight of hand tricks at CSX, changing the accounting classification of several items in such a way that they enhance the bottom line, while not actually changing anything.
As for getting rid of your boss's entire drop and hook operation - all you need to account for is the reduction of costs it would engender - no more maintenance, no manpower or fuel costs to do the drops and pickups, etc. We won't worry about the loss of income until it happens... By then the in-it-for-the-money investors will have cashed out.
Actually Tree if we got rid of the drop and hook operations especially on the Hazardous materials side our overall costs would about double. Why more trucks required to serve our customers. By having the trailers there ready to go our drivers run in the tanker fleet drop the clean empty grab the load and head out. After they empty they head for our nearest contract tankwash drop that dirty trailer get a clean one head for their reload.
For our van fleet they drop the empty grab the load and go after getting their bill of lading. For most of our customers their in and out in less than 20 mins. We keep our drivers rolling not waiting to get loaded or unloaded. For us the expensive part is the truck part they run about 150k to 180k each. A van trailer is 30 grand and we keep them in the fleet 15 years. A tank of either style is about 60 grand new good for 20 years. So on a per year basis the costs to have drop and hook fleets isn't to high. Plates are 100 bucks for 5 yrs. It is worth the extra equipment costs. JB Hunt has over 30k trailers containers and chassis for only 8k trucks.
Shadow the Cats ownerActually Tree if we got rid of the drop and hook operations especially on the Hazardous materials side our overall costs would about double.
I was talking about getting rid of the drop and hook business altogether...
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...
Just to update on some open remarks/questions here....yes operations are still in the toilet. Getting worse in some areas, cars out of route, cars sitting for many days, transit times double in some regions, some problem areas still a problem that went downhill over 4 months ago. I am not surprised at the short term remarks. He was in a rush to get the board to approve his 84 mil compensation in June, he knows he is on a short time limit, that is why he is ramming through all kinds of drastic cost cuts in such a hurry, he knows he has very little time to cash in. He works from home and defys any medical disclosure as the real truth if let out would not be the best news. Numerous sources inside the rail industry has it he has emphasyma....pictures of him at board meetings in not to distant weeks he looks gray as concrete. The best thing that could happen for CSX is his tenure is EXTREMELY short. We are looking to pull every pound of business off CSX as we can as their service failures are costing us and he hope to avoid shutting a plant down. The less we can do with them the better.
This post about EHH brings to mind a Mark Twain short story about one captain Scoresby who fought in the Crimean War. The story goes on about Scorseby's complete and utter incompetence in battle after battle..yet luck is always on his sides as wins one and then another. Both superiors and and his subordinates are confounded by his victories as he makes one "blunder" after another. Maybe one can say the same about EHH.. he's doing stuff that makes little sense to others.. but.. maybe he's like Scorseby.. is it folly or pure genius? Only time will tell..
Tree we can't due to the FMCSA regulations on HOS for one 2 our customers want us to provide that service and 3 Hazmat Regulations require clean tank trailers after every load. The last time we ordered trailers in a large quantity was 10 years ago as we waited to see how the 2007 emissions regulations were going to work out for us. Yes we have replaced a few trailers and added a few over the years but have not ordered over 20 trailers in the last 10 years each year. It adds up to enough to turn over the fleet.
Our trailer cost per mile is about 9 cents a mile to run them for the year. We need every trailer we have. Drop and hook operations are a major part of JIT logistics stop that and the economy would crash.
Shadow - got it.
My point was that your expenses would drop (less fuel, less trucks, less people), which would make the bottom line look good - for a while. Which is pretty much exactly what EHH is doing.
Tree easiest way to think of drop and hooking is this way. Think of a rail yard the trailers are the cars switched and ready to go to their delivery point. We have 4 major customers near us that take 4 local drivers 11 hours daily to cover and preload over 50 trailers a day. Now 2 of these include bringing clean trailers from our yard to the plant. We estimated getting rid of drop and hook would cost us about 10 million in lost revenue a year. Not exactly chump change. It costs us about 500 grand a year in fuel wages and other costs. We use our oldest trucks for local service. Heck they are older than the drivers one is an 81 another is an 88 the newest is a 90 and the one that puts around town is a 79. Basically we are using our equivalent of a 38-2 for the job.
Shadow the Cats ownerIt costs us about 500 grand a year in fuel wages and other costs.
So, in the short term, dropping it would add $500K to your bottom line. See - we've made some money for our investors!
We'll find some way to make the 10 mil you would have made on it disappear into some charge off or another. Maybe push it off onto next year.
The bottom line is that with a sharp pencil, the accountants can make it look like dropping the service was a great idea...
The fact that you view it as a money maker (as it certainly appears that it is) is why you'll keep providing the service. EHH doesn't seem to see that side of the equation. As long as he can cut the expense side of the ledger today, he doesn't care that he's going to lose those customers in the long run.
A number of years ago when I was involved with creating the Baltimore Terminal Services Center for the Chessie System, I got to review a number of studies that had been performed over the years. One that I remember recommended closing the Curtis Bay Coal Pier - closing it would save $20M in operating and maintenance costs - of course to save the $20M the company would have had to forgo the $250M of revenues that the coal pier generated.
Short term sharp pencils. All revenues have costs. All costs support revenue generation in some way.
We got rid of drop and hook and never looked back.. mind you, most of what we do is flatbed where drop and hook is less prevalent. In essence drop and hook caters to shippers' schedules.. so that they can load trailers at their convenience and without holding up drivers. I get that.. but... the rates paid hardly justify carriers maintaining a trailer bank of two to four trailers per power unit. Those trailers spend 50% of their time sitting at docks and being abused by shippers who load them improperly.. shippers who employ tow motor drivers who think they're formula one drivers.. they'll tear the skuff boards apart by sliding along the sides of the trailers and, since no one is watching they'll plough the freight on without any consideration for balancing the load. Great if you can afford to leave a 30K investment sitting at a shipper/receiver unattended and that will be used and abused by Homer Simpson and his brethern who are vastly overpaid at minimum wage.. No thanks! Now back to regular railroad programming..
Ulrich with some of the stuff we haul the fines for a spill for the shipper since our drivers are not allowed into the loading platform as it requires full PPE suiting with SCUBA packs. Yes every now and then a trailer gets dinged up by a new guy running the forklift however the bill we send for the damages normally solves that issues really fast. Also the shippers that preload us know our weight limits and heck in the last 3 years I think 1 time has a driver had to go back to rework a trailer by having the load redone. Our largest shipper is unexpanded styrofoam beads for our van fleet they know how we need it loaded to the point the drivers have a mark on the tandems for where to set them for when loaded.
We don't monkey around with places that do damage our equipment if we can help it why it costs us money. We are still fighting with Wal-Mart to get them to pay for the freaking last one of our trailers they did damage unloading it. One of their forklift drivers punched a hole in the freaking nose of a trailer at full speed and they wonder why we are demanding they pay for it. We are going to be banned anyways from dealing with them why we do haul some for Amazon and Wal-Mart and their Paranoia is banning any carrier that hauls for Amazon. Oh well let them ban us. Wonder how well that will work the the mega carriers that are doing dedicated for both of them.
The shear amount of stupidity you deal with in any industry where leadership refuses to learn and thinks only their way is the best way regardless of how situations have changed is mindblowing. EHH thinks his way is the only way that is going to improve CSX yet his plan is not fully implemented and already we can see it isn't going to work there and yet he is being stubborn and pushing forward. He refuses to think that just maybe the reason why CSX can't be made better is maybe the way the terrain and then the operations demand of it. When you have multiple mountains to cross and a varied mix of freight from coal to high speed IM you don't rip out mainlines to force them all to one speed you need to add space so they can pass each other. Then his demand of no helpers on Sandpatch and forcing coal and heavy trains to double it this is not the 1800's helpers are there for a reason to keep the main open not plug it with half a train held only by handbrakes. What will be his next lame idea to save money get rid of dynamic brakes.
BaltACD A number of years ago when I was involved with creating the Baltimore Terminal Services Center for the Chessie System, I got to review a number of studies that had been performed over the years. One that I remember recommended closing the Curtis Bay Coal Pier - closing it would save $20M in operating and maintenance costs - of course to save the $20M the company would have had to forgo the $250M of revenues that the coal pier generated. Short term sharp pencils. All revenues have costs. All costs support revenue generation in some way.
Chuck,
IMO, the bean counters have their own strange way of looking at the overall picture. Save money at the expense of losing the very revenue that incurs such expenses is pure folly. Harrison may succeed in cutting some expenses. Too many hump yards sounds legit to me, and closing them may, in the end, be the proper action. OTOH, from reports I've seen CSX is currently in the same meltdown situation UP found themselves when they bought SP. It took UP some time to clear up that mess and this may be only a temporary setback.
In my estimation, both CSX and NS are very different railroads than the other class I's. Both were built to service the coal industry and in comparison to the others are complex spider webs that were necessary to those industries.
Coal is down, but not yet out by any means. Renewables appear to be viable only through subsidies, and thanks to those subsidies the rate for electricity has, in my area, gone up forty percent in the last year. If this progress include me out.
I'm of the mind that Harrison wants CSX to be basically an intermodal operation like the western roads; fast, and with quick turnarounds. I don't think that is likely to happen given the dependence on coal and carload traffic that has long been CSX's "raison de'etere".
Just my two-cents worth from a guy who has no rail related experience but has known some savvy employees who have inside information the public does not get.
Your choice to retire could have not been more timely.
Norm
Paul of Covington "Rule 1100 (f)[13]" !!! How many rules do you guys have to know?!?!
"Rule 1100 (f)[13]" !!! How many rules do you guys have to know?!?!
My current stash. Two different rulebooks for two railroads. Also a timetable for a 3rd RR that I'm no longer good on, but it's still in that phonebook of a binder. Metal clipboard under the white papers has operation bulletins for the one railroad. Yellow things are track warrant/permission/authority/Form D sort of things.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
Now he wants to single track the Chicago line. It used to run 50-60 trains a day west of Buffalo. I can't tell what the hell is going on with all the changes and I live right near it. Good luck in the winter when the switch heaters can't keep up with the lake affect snow storms and crossovers become useless
Zug, what a wonderful collection--and I know you have them all memorized.
This a little different from needing to carry only a pocket-sized rule book, isn't it?
zugmann Paul of Covington "Rule 1100 (f)[13]" !!! How many rules do you guys have to know?!?! My current stash. Two different rulebooks for two railroads. Also a timetable for a 3rd RR that I'm no longer good on, but it's still in that phonebook of a binder. Metal clipboard under the white papers has operation bulletins for the one railroad. Yellow things are track warrant/permission/authority/Form D sort of things.
And Zug doesn't operate in or around Chicago, where there is the requirement to have in one's possession Rule Books, timetables and bulletins for every railroad you are qualified to operate on 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 or more.
Once upon a time T&E personnel carried one grip that carried their clothes, snacks and required rule books, timetables and bulletins. In the present day, they have one grip for their required paperwork (and it weighs a ton) and another grip for their daily living supplies.
Maybe someday they'll digitize it all so that every rule book ever written can be conveniently accessed electronically. When did they get rid of stone tablets... in 1989?
UlrichMaybe someday they'll digitize it all so that every rule book ever written can be conveniently accessed electronically. When did they get rid of stone tablets... in 1989?
I'm pretty sure that's already happened - note the NORAC 10th Edition I referenced earlier.
The problem is electronic devices on which to read them. Currently you can't have them in the cab...
One of these days, I'm sure that we'll see installed computers (besides those that run the locomotive, etc) that will contain only the data the railroad wants available to the crews - no baseball scores...
This would also allow for track warrants/EC1's/Form D's to be sent electronically, with some form of biometric verification that would replace the readback.
But, that's a lot of computers. I'm sure EHH would prefer to stay with paper - especially if the crews bring their own photocopies of the blank forms and use their own pencils...
Electroliner 1935 Also, I note that the film mentions 3 point protection. Something else that EHH has (as I understand it, has or wants to do away with) Back to the dark ages.
Also, I note that the film mentions 3 point protection. Something else that EHH has (as I understand it, has or wants to do away with) Back to the dark ages.
Geez. So which of the three steps get omitted?
1. Gen field switch down
2. Reverser centered
3. Independent applied
Who would want to go between cars or hang a marker without this? It only takes a few seconds to do....
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
oltmanndGeez. So which of the three steps get omitted? 1. Gen field switch down 2. Reverser centered 3. Independent applied Who would want to go between cars or hang a marker without this? It only takes a few seconds to do....
Yeah - I'm pretty much bamboozled by this one, too. In fact, if you've got a crew that's used to working together, three step is already in place when the crewmember calls for it. If not, as you say, it takes seconds. If it was a long, complicated process, I might buy in, but it's not.
I'd certainly like to hear his rationale.
Can only use company issued electronics while on duty.
tree68 oltmannd Geez. So which of the three steps get omitted? 1. Gen field switch down 2. Reverser centered 3. Independent applied Who would want to go between cars or hang a marker without this? It only takes a few seconds to do.... Yeah - I'm pretty much bamboozled by this one, too. In fact, if you've got a crew that's used to working together, three step is already in place when the crewmember calls for it. If not, as you say, it takes seconds. If it was a long, complicated process, I might buy in, but it's not. I'd certainly like to hear his rationale.
oltmannd Geez. So which of the three steps get omitted? 1. Gen field switch down 2. Reverser centered 3. Independent applied Who would want to go between cars or hang a marker without this? It only takes a few seconds to do....
Who says any of it is omitted? The rule requiring a certain form to request and grant said protection is being removed. We have red zone, but before we had that codified we always had an understanding between trainman and engineer when someone was going to be in between cars. We did by radio or by hand signal when in sight. Now our red zone has to be over the radio.
In some ways putting exact procedures into the rules can twist a practice to become more of a way to issue discipline and less about safety itself. For instance, a conductor and engineer can have a face to face briefing that establishes a red zone. But that's not good enough. It must be announced to the world (managers listening in) over the radio. Since it only applies to the crew and train that are using red zone, any other train (if there is one in the vicinity) isn't affected. In a yard setting you might argue that a yard job working an adjacent track might hear it, but half the time yard jobs are working on a different channel. We have a few other practices that because of different channels being used in some areas renders the practices more about the appearance of safety than actually being safe.
In the long run it's all about liablity mitigation. That's one thing EHH seems not to be concerned about. That's probably the only good thing I can say about him. He wants (for those still working) to railroad, not worry if the company will be sued by someone. It's too bad some of his other practices will run off some business and limit future growth.
Jeff
BaltACD Ulrich Maybe someday they'll digitize it all so that every rule book ever written can be conveniently accessed electronically. When did they get rid of stone tablets... in 1989? Can only use company issued electronics while on duty.
Ulrich Maybe someday they'll digitize it all so that every rule book ever written can be conveniently accessed electronically. When did they get rid of stone tablets... in 1989?
Might be more cost effective to issue company electronics for this specific purpose. Those massive paper tomes must also cost alot to produce and maintain, not to mention the deforestation involved..
Ulrich BaltACD Ulrich Maybe someday they'll digitize it all so that every rule book ever written can be conveniently accessed electronically. When did they get rid of stone tablets... in 1989? Can only use company issued electronics while on duty. Might be more cost effective to issue company electronics for this specific purpose. Those massive paper tomes must also cost alot to produce and maintain, not to mention the deforestation involved..
The battle cry in CSX Technology for years has been 'paperless'.
My guess in the 'paperless' enviornment paper usage has increased (tho I don't have access to the facts one way or the other). There are places where paper is superior to electronics and vice versa - there is not right way for all places and conditions.
We are allowed to use personal electronic devices for rules, timetables, special instructions, etc. When used on a moving train the wireless communication capability, if so equipped, must be disabled and the device turned back off and stowed when done. I prefer paper so don't use electronics, even though it lightens the load. With paper I don't have to worry about the battery going dead just when I need it.
All our general orders, local bulletins, etc on the computer are set up so in some cases it's actually easier to download them than to print them. For all the talk about not using electronic devices, they sure push their use in this area.
jeffhergertWho says any of it is omitted? The rule requiring a certain form to request and grant said protection is being removed.
Thanks. This makes sense to me.
tree68This would also allow for track warrants/EC1's/Form D's to be sent electronically, with some form of biometric verification that would replace the readback.
That will soon be done via PTC. Your limits will be given to you/rolled up on the PTC display.
Scuttlebutt was that we were going to be issued tablets of soem sort for our rulebooks. (just what I need - something else to keep charged)
Local conductors currently use electronic tablet things for their work orders. But they didn't load up the rulebooks in them for some reason. I think we can use our personal electronic devices for rules and stuff, but honestly, I'd rather just use the book for now. Seems to be easier to stay out of trouble that way.
June 1, 1999 NS & CSX split ConRail. NS went into near immediate meltdown as they attempted to learn how to operate their 'new' property. After several months of chaos they dug themselves out.
CSX came out of 'Day 1' with a relatively fluid operation of both old and new sides of the property.
On or about August 1, 1999 'the keys' of the operation were turned over to former ConRail officials that chose CSX as their 'resting place' post split. With those officals implementation of the ConRail strategy of 'few bigger trains', the CSX network began the descent into operational gridlock. Terminals couldn't yard trains because they couldn't disptach the trains they alreay had on the terminal because of a lack of power that was on the inbound trains that could not be yarded. This situation continued until such time as those former ConRail officials were given their walking papers. I suspect the BoD finally woke up and got a real sniff of reality.
How long will it take the current CSX BoD to wake up and smell the gridlocked cesspool that has been created in the past 4 months?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.