We have had instances reported on this forum. What is needed to get the efficiency and assett utilization for customer oriented railroading to be close to that of precision railroding is a computer program that works in real time to input each load and empty movement,with the input at the moment the customer requests service, and then schedule trains, power, and crew most efficiently. But maybe thst is just a dream.
daveklepperAnd they can turn away others through pricing.
They can also effectively turn others away by simply refusing to give reasonable service. For example, remove the local and have through trains do the switch. But the through train is behind schedule, so the car gets carried on through. It comes back eastward two days later to catch the next westbound, but the railroad is congested and making the setoff will create gridlock, so again it gets carried on through...... Repeat as necessary until the customer goes away. Yes it happens, although whether it is by malice or simply not caring is unclear.
So far, the only customers actually "turned away" are intermodal, and I was referring to that customer abandonment only. The other PSR divestures are abandoments and sales of actual tracks, and that is subject to regulation already. And they can turn away others through pricing. That may bring complaints, as you suggest.
The thinking behind Precision Scheduled Railroading seems to suggest that we can have a great railroad if we don't service the customers who don't fit the plan. This can be an issue that will cause those customers to complain to the STB. Enough complaints and the specter of re-regulation will appear.
I think Matt Rose's operating philosophy, which at least I define as customer oriented, is best in the long term for BNSF. Precision Railroad can be defined as assets' utiliztion orientation. In a recessive economy or one with only very moderate growth, pehaps the latter is best for the long term, and in any case is best for just short-term gains. But Ross, BNSF, and Birkshire are betting on a robust economy. I think they will win. Lower profits on individual specific operations, because of excess capacity in some lanes and at some times, will be more than compensated by far greater increases in overall business, taken both from over-road long-distance trucking and from the UP.
Where I disagree is regarding Federal whistle-blowing on the other Class I's "Precision Railroading" divesture of certain intermodel lanes. Except of some ship-rail-customer moves, this business always involves a truck at one end, usually at both. Intermodel save the trucksr money, but without ntermodal the trucker can continue to serve the same customers. We don't see the Governmens (USA, Canada, Mexico) forcing railroads to accept LCL business,
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.