Miningman Ouch....good one.
Ouch....good one.
Yes the analogy to the link and pin coupling paddle is highly fitting. In that case, it was the industry pushing the device to address a dramatically obvious need. And yet labor widely rejected the safety knife for a variety of reasons. One of those reasons was the feeling that the saftey knives were for sissies and not real men. That same objection was widely directed to the air brake effect of eliminating the need for brakement to "deckorate" the car tops and wind handbrakes on the road; according to John White in his book, The American Railroad Freight Car.
In the case of CSX, I would just like to hear their explanation for banning brake sticks. Their action is just the opposite of the industry push for coupling paddles back in the 1800s. CSX must feel that brake sticks don't reduce accidents and waste time and money. I wonder if they also feel that brake sticks result in less than fully set brakes. It would be interesting to hear their explanation for such an unusual move as to ban a widely used safety device.
EuclidConsidering that brake sticks have been so widely accepted in the industry, I would think that the supporting statistics would be well known and readily available.
They are. But much of the basis of the statistics may be carefully chosen to suit proponents' arguments ... that, of course, also being true for the opposition.
And I have always thought that the Bishop coupling knife or something like it was a valuable and essential tool in making up trains with link-and-pin couplers.
Considering that brake sticks have been so widely accepted in the indudstry, I would think that the supporting statistics would be well known and readily available.
Euclid BaltACD EHH is against the procedures that Michael Ward's CSX was for and for everything Ward's CSX was against. Let's see how injuries affect the bottom line. Will the ban on brake sticks increase injuries?
BaltACD EHH is against the procedures that Michael Ward's CSX was for and for everything Ward's CSX was against. Let's see how injuries affect the bottom line.
Will the ban on brake sticks increase injuries?
Possibly. I don't have access to the injury statistics that CSX based their use of brake sticks upon, however, knowing how CSX operated prior to EHH coming on the property it was a 'fact based' decision. Those facts being actual injuries and actual payouts for those injuries. I don't know if EHH can make the same claims for the rules he has changed.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDEHH is against the procedures that Michael Ward's CSX was for and for everything Ward's CSX was against. Let's see how injuries affect the bottom line.
Euclid BaltACD Euclid BaltACD Another change banned the use of the brake stick, meaning conductors now have to tie the brakes by hand. What reason has CSX given for banning the use of a brake stick? I get the feeling this is a Trump-Obama type thing. Does Obama use a brake stick?
BaltACD Euclid BaltACD Another change banned the use of the brake stick, meaning conductors now have to tie the brakes by hand. What reason has CSX given for banning the use of a brake stick? I get the feeling this is a Trump-Obama type thing.
Euclid BaltACD Another change banned the use of the brake stick, meaning conductors now have to tie the brakes by hand. What reason has CSX given for banning the use of a brake stick?
BaltACD Another change banned the use of the brake stick, meaning conductors now have to tie the brakes by hand.
What reason has CSX given for banning the use of a brake stick?
I get the feeling this is a Trump-Obama type thing.
Does Obama use a brake stick?
Might have if he ever worked for CSX. The only thing Trump is FOR is what Obama was against and vice versa. If Obama had stated the Sun rises in the East, Trump will tweet that is rises in the West and will bully people to believe it.
EHH is against the procedures that Michael Ward's CSX was for and for everything Ward's CSX was against. Let's see how injuries affect the bottom line.
Euclid I can see how there could be pros and cons to using them. So why then do they seem to be universally embraced? Is their use optional at this time? Do some railroades require their use? Why would a company find brake sticks to be so ojectionalble that they would ban them? Surely CSX must have publically stated their reason for banning them.
I can see how there could be pros and cons to using them. So why then do they seem to be universally embraced? Is their use optional at this time? Do some railroades require their use? Why would a company find brake sticks to be so ojectionalble that they would ban them? Surely CSX must have publically stated their reason for banning them.
Since CN doesn't allow use of them (CP??), perhaps EHH brought that custom with him?
BaltACD EHH and his minions playing the classic game of 'GOTCHA'. Just like in football and the penalty call of holding - it can be called on every play if the zebras so choose. Officials in the railroad can always find 'something' that people working in the field don't comply with. The Safety Rules, while created in blood, have been passed through the legal department to be written in 'gotcha'.
EHH and his minions playing the classic game of 'GOTCHA'.
Just like in football and the penalty call of holding - it can be called on every play if the zebras so choose. Officials in the railroad can always find 'something' that people working in the field don't comply with.
The Safety Rules, while created in blood, have been passed through the legal department to be written in 'gotcha'.
+1
Jeff
Our trainmen are required to use brake sticks whenever available. They don't have to be issued one, but if one is issued it must be used all the time. If a condr doesn't have one, they are placed in locked holders at strategic locations. Most vans have carry them. Most like the brake stick, but they also don't like to have to use them all the time. Sometimes it's easier to just get on the car and tie/release the hand brake.
Our Red Zone/Set and Centered is also nothing we didn't do before it became a formalized procedure in the rules. (And if it went away, it's nothing we wouldn't still do.) Ever since it was formalized it seems (IMO) to have become less about our safety, but more about appearing to be proactive about safety. We have a couple of other things that, because of the implementation, give the impression of safety-but have loop holes that could still get the unwary injured or worse.
We're having the same problems with loss of communication when the condr has to walk long trains. Anything over about a mile and most portables seem to have a problem reaching the head end. And most manifests are maxed out whenever possible. Two mile long or more is normal for most manifests anymore.
On brake sticks, CN does not use them (in Canada at least) so everyone around here ties brakes by hand. When is trained and practiced in the proper procedures (3 point contact etc) it is not unsafe to do so.
For a long time the brake stick has been something of a bad joke around here, a tool which is listed and pictured in the rulebook only no one has ever really seen one, just like the "knucklemate" drawbar aligning tool (do those even exist?). But if those who use the brake stick like them then I suppose they are a good idea.
Three-step protection is just words, they are a good reminder of what needs to be done but if a Engineer does not automatically apply the independent and centre the reverser after being told to stop he or she should not be working on a railroad. CN did not use any form of additional communication protection when I hired on, you simply told the engineer to stop and they would stop, any additional communication like "handbrakes" or "cutting in the air" was for the benefit of a good job briefing as opposed to complying with specific safety rules. I did not feel unsafe working in that environment, and even today CN does not use three-step, instead we have "set & centred" (similar but the generator field switch does not have to be turned off).
Getting off/off moving equipment is the same, CN's rules have allowed 4 mph for a long as I have been here (long ago it was 6, and in the bad old days before that there were no rulebook restrictions) and if you are trained & practiced in the proper procedures it is not unsafe. CN did ban getting on/off moving equipment for a few months a couple years ago, and everyone hated it. Work became so much slower and annoying from our perspective, and productivity sank too (yard crews went from flat switching 250 cars a shift to 50 until they made an exception that allowed you to get on/off free rolling cars). Everybody was happy when 4 mph on/off returned.
But if a switch is made abruptly to any new procedures without taking the time to properly train and educate employees about them, then that is unsafe. And nothing justifies oppressing and firing people who try to raise those concerns.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
It sounds like this employee might have a reasonable gripe about the circumstances surrounding his firing, but he's not a whistleblower for calling out rule amendments.
Whistleblower protection is for those who call out people for violating rules and laws, particualarly in negligent situations.
CSX has changed these rules and some percieve them as less safe, slower, whatever. But they're still within the confines of acceptable railroad practice. He might not like those changes, and he should probably be allowed to complain, but he seems to be trying to claim that he's a whistleblower because CSX is abandoning safety...but they aren't.
Now if CSX was telling people to never tie handbrakes, or get on or off moving equipment at any speed, well then sure he'd probably have a case. But as long as the railroad isn't being negligent and is following the applicable laws related to railroad operating rules, well then he has no actual legal complaint against the railroad for their rule changes.
The circumstances around his dismissal, well I just don't know enough about that topic to really get a firm idea as to his case's chances.
OvermodMy impression is that they aren't ergonomically 'optimized' for hard pulling both in final securement or to release a jammed-in or recalcitrant wheel; railroaders could comment on how useful they are for 'pump' brakes. Even more restricted if you are hanging on to something with one hand ... and I don't think you can use them at all the way you'd use a brake club as a lever -- at best they would bend quickly and I don't think they straighten out well once they do.
I';ve been using brakesticks for close to 10 years, shifting in a yard on a grade, mostly sans air (so we don't do sissy brakes). I've never had those problems. (I also don't use it as a brake club, since it isn't a brake club).
Personal thought: I think a lot of the people that are anti-brakesticks are the macho types that think they have something to prove out here. "REAL RRers climb railcars!" Whatever. I have nothing to prove. I'm all for tools that make my job easier. Brakesticks are one of those tools.
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
Euclid BaltACD Another change banned the use of the brake stick, meaning conductors now have to tie the brakes by hand.
I get the feeling this is a Trump-Obama type thing. Because prior CSX Management required it, EHH outlaw's it.
Use of a brake stick permits the brakemen to remain with two feet on the track structure when applying wheel type hand brakes - no matter if they are mounted high or low on the car - prior CSX managment viewed Brake Sticks as the 'employees' safest means of applying hand brakes as they would not have to climb, descend and hang on to the car in order to apply and release hand brakes.
BaltACDAnother change banned the use of the brake stick, meaning conductors now have to tie the brakes by hand.
No matter the industry or activity - Whistle Blowers have a very tough road to travel to get to a destination that will have made the journey worth their time and efforts. Every step of the way will be an obstical. And the journey will be obstical after obstical. Blowing the Whistle is not for the weak of heart or conviction.
MidlandMike Why didn't he file a complaint with the FRA ? Even if the agency doesn't do anything about it, it is a matter of public record, and it's not his fault if the media runs with it. Aslo he would seem to more likely get wistleblower protection. Additionally, could he have gone to the union?
Why didn't he file a complaint with the FRA ? Even if the agency doesn't do anything about it, it is a matter of public record, and it's not his fault if the media runs with it. Aslo he would seem to more likely get wistleblower protection. Additionally, could he have gone to the union?
The employee was possibly quite naïve about whistleblower protection procedures, etc.
Many Corporations now have within their "Rule Structures" awarning that generally says employees are NOT to speak to "The Media" without prior permissions being given from the management.
The wording may be different, but the meaning, and warning is crystal clear. The Trap is there, set and waiting, for the unsuspecting, to fall into it...
Punishments can vary, as to the nature,{ and potential publicity} the incident will bring about. Best to have your "T's" crossed, and your "I's" dotted when someone comes poking a microphone or camera at you, particularly,while you are on the job, or asked about it.
'
Fired CSX conductor seeking whistleblower protection, changes within company
WJAX-TV (Online) (CBS) (Jacksonville, FL) By Kevin Clark November 30, 2017 A former CSX employee says he was fired for speaking out about safety concerns to the company and in an interview with Action News Jax. Louis Billingsley is now seeking whistleblower protection. He was fired by CSX this month after nearly 12 years as a conductor. During a July interview with Action News Jax, Billingsley shared his concerns about the abolition of certain safety procedures for rail workers. One policy change eliminated the three-step rule, an extra safeguard to keep cars from moving when employees are working between or under them. Another change banned the use of the brake stick, meaning conductors now have to tie the brakes by hand. “It’s just a matter of time before someone seriously gets hurt,” Billingsley told Action News Jax Thursday. CSX has been under scrutiny for other operating changes since CEO Hunter Harrison took over earlier this year. As CSX has cut jobs to try to increase efficiency, it has consolidated trains to make them longer. Billingsley claims the trains have become too long, making it hard for rail employees to communicate from one end to the other. The longer trains often block neighborhoods and streets for hours at a time on their way in and out of railyards. “We need to show that we care about the public, we care about the people, and sometimes that’s worth more than record-breaking profits,” Billingsley said. But Billingsley says when he raised these concerns, CSX became retaliatory. A day after Billingsley interviewed with Action News Jax in July, he received a short voicemail telling him he’d been fired. “I couldn’t believe it, I was like, ‘Wow, they really want to shut you up,’” said Billingsley. Not 40 minutes later, another voicemail from CSX told him he’d been rehired. “I think they realized what they did, and they put me back into service,” he said. But for the next couple of months after that, Billingsley claims he was targeted, and that his superiors followed him around and watched his every move. “Almost two months later, they got me. On a minor infraction,” he said. The dismissal letter obtained by Action News Jax says Billingsley was fired for running in the gauge of the rail, operating a switch with one hand, and “not maintaining visual contact with the equipment while making a shove move.” But Billingsley tells us everyone within CSX knew he was fired because he spoke out against the changes associated with Precision Railroading, and what he calls the “culture of fear” within the company. “It was all from that interview I placed,” he said. “And I did the interview because I think the public needs to know what kind of environment CSX has become.” When Action News Jax reached out to CSX for this story, a company spokesperson told us: "CSX does not comment on individual personnel matters. Safety remains CSX’s highest priority in every aspect of our operations." She then added: "CSX denies any allegation that it would retaliate against an employee who raises safety concerns." Billingsley has retained an attorney, who is filing a complaint with OSHA. The attorney, John Magnuson, told Action News Jax that if Billingsley doesn’t get his job back, they’ll likely file a whistleblower protection lawsuit in federal court. “I’m an example of what happens when you open your mouth and voice a concern,” Billingsley said.
By Kevin Clark
November 30, 2017
A former CSX employee says he was fired for speaking out about safety concerns to the company and in an interview with Action News Jax.
Louis Billingsley is now seeking whistleblower protection.
He was fired by CSX this month after nearly 12 years as a conductor.
During a July interview with Action News Jax, Billingsley shared his concerns about the abolition of certain safety procedures for rail workers.
One policy change eliminated the three-step rule, an extra safeguard to keep cars from moving when employees are working between or under them.
Another change banned the use of the brake stick, meaning conductors now have to tie the brakes by hand.
“It’s just a matter of time before someone seriously gets hurt,” Billingsley told Action News Jax Thursday.
CSX has been under scrutiny for other operating changes since CEO Hunter Harrison took over earlier this year.
As CSX has cut jobs to try to increase efficiency, it has consolidated trains to make them longer.
Billingsley claims the trains have become too long, making it hard for rail employees to communicate from one end to the other.
The longer trains often block neighborhoods and streets for hours at a time on their way in and out of railyards.
“We need to show that we care about the public, we care about the people, and sometimes that’s worth more than record-breaking profits,” Billingsley said.
But Billingsley says when he raised these concerns, CSX became retaliatory.
A day after Billingsley interviewed with Action News Jax in July, he received a short voicemail telling him he’d been fired.
“I couldn’t believe it, I was like, ‘Wow, they really want to shut you up,’” said Billingsley.
Not 40 minutes later, another voicemail from CSX told him he’d been rehired.
“I think they realized what they did, and they put me back into service,” he said.
But for the next couple of months after that, Billingsley claims he was targeted, and that his superiors followed him around and watched his every move.
“Almost two months later, they got me. On a minor infraction,” he said.
The dismissal letter obtained by Action News Jax says Billingsley was fired for running in the gauge of the rail, operating a switch with one hand, and “not maintaining visual contact with the equipment while making a shove move.”
But Billingsley tells us everyone within CSX knew he was fired because he spoke out against the changes associated with Precision Railroading, and what he calls the “culture of fear” within the company.
“It was all from that interview I placed,” he said. “And I did the interview because I think the public needs to know what kind of environment CSX has become.”
When Action News Jax reached out to CSX for this story, a company spokesperson told us:
"CSX does not comment on individual personnel matters. Safety remains CSX’s highest priority in every aspect of our operations."
She then added:
"CSX denies any allegation that it would retaliate against an employee who raises safety concerns."
Billingsley has retained an attorney, who is filing a complaint with OSHA.
The attorney, John Magnuson, told Action News Jax that if Billingsley doesn’t get his job back, they’ll likely file a whistleblower protection lawsuit in federal court.
“I’m an example of what happens when you open your mouth and voice a concern,” Billingsley said.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.