Less than half, annually! And even that is assuming full employment.
mvlandsw n012944 mvlandsw How many trains, maintenance crews, and miles of track do the Lake States' dispatchers deal with? Irrelevant. Why is it irrelevant? People with greater responsibilities usually get higher pay.
n012944 mvlandsw How many trains, maintenance crews, and miles of track do the Lake States' dispatchers deal with? Irrelevant.
mvlandsw How many trains, maintenance crews, and miles of track do the Lake States' dispatchers deal with?
How many trains, maintenance crews, and miles of track do the Lake States' dispatchers deal with?
Irrelevant.
Why is it irrelevant? People with greater responsibilities usually get higher pay.
At a class one that is unionized, all dispatchers covered under their contract get the same rate of pay. There are hard desks, and easy desks, and they are paid the same.
Before CSX sold/leased tracks to the Lake States they had two dispatchers a shift, who would both make well over 130K a year under the new contract, handle the majority of the state of Michigan. Now, CSX employes 1 dispatcher with that rate of pay, and the Lake States has one, making $18 bucks an hour.
An "expensive model collector"
Psychot n012944 Psychot Forget growing the business; the Class 1's are actively shedding business if they don't think the profit margins are big enough. Besides that, as Jeff points out, short lines prove day-in and day-out that there's more business to be had if you put in the effort. Shortlines also do not pay their employees as well, so they can afford to go after traffic that the class ones may not be able to afford to. The Lake States pays their dispatchers $18 dollars an hour. Class ones pay theirs around $50. I would think you'd need more sales and customer service people to get and retain that business rather than operating employees. Sales and customer service people aren't going to be as expensive because they wouldn't be working the ridiculous schedule that operating employees work.
n012944 Psychot Forget growing the business; the Class 1's are actively shedding business if they don't think the profit margins are big enough. Besides that, as Jeff points out, short lines prove day-in and day-out that there's more business to be had if you put in the effort. Shortlines also do not pay their employees as well, so they can afford to go after traffic that the class ones may not be able to afford to. The Lake States pays their dispatchers $18 dollars an hour. Class ones pay theirs around $50.
Psychot Forget growing the business; the Class 1's are actively shedding business if they don't think the profit margins are big enough. Besides that, as Jeff points out, short lines prove day-in and day-out that there's more business to be had if you put in the effort.
Forget growing the business; the Class 1's are actively shedding business if they don't think the profit margins are big enough. Besides that, as Jeff points out, short lines prove day-in and day-out that there's more business to be had if you put in the effort.
Shortlines also do not pay their employees as well, so they can afford to go after traffic that the class ones may not be able to afford to.
The Lake States pays their dispatchers $18 dollars an hour. Class ones pay theirs around $50.
I would think you'd need more sales and customer service people to get and retain that business rather than operating employees. Sales and customer service people aren't going to be as expensive because they wouldn't be working the ridiculous schedule that operating employees work.
Sales and marketing people are worthless without the operating people to back up their promises.
charlie hebdoPSR = Pecunia Summum Regit
What Cotton Belt said...
Probably the best answer to the initials I've seen.
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...
BaltACD Sales and Marketing were the first organizations that were gutted when PSR was implemented.
Sales and Marketing were the first organizations that were gutted when PSR was implemented.
What's your basis for saying this?
You've mentioned several times that you retired before EHH came to CSX, and that you really don't know much about happened then, so you must have gotten this information some other way?
Dan
tree68Which follows the mantra that PSR has nothing to do with precision, scheduling, or railroading, but rather moving money to the bottom line to be harvested...
PSR = Pecunia Summum Regit
PsychotSales and customer service are two of those areas where machines may never replace humans. BaltACDSales and Marketing were the first organizations that were gutted when PSR was implemented.
BaltACDSales and Marketing were the first organizations that were gutted when PSR was implemented.
Which follows the mantra that PSR has nothing to do with precision, scheduling, or railroading, but rather moving money to the bottom line to be harvested...
Psychot n012944 Psychot Forget growing the business; the Class 1's are actively shedding business if they don't think the profit margins are big enough. Besides that, as Jeff points out, short lines prove day-in and day-out that there's more business to be had if you put in the effort. Shortlines also do not pay their employees as well, so they can afford to go after traffic that the class ones may not be able to afford to. The Lake States pays their dispatchers $18 dollars an hour. Class ones pay theirs around $50. I would think you'd need more sales and customer service people to get and retain that business rather than operating employees. Sales and customer service people aren't going to be as expensive because they wouldn't be working the ridiculous schedule that operating employees work. The problem, as I see it, is that the C1s are trying to take human beings completely out of the equation. Sales and customer service are two of those areas where machines may never replace humans.
The problem, as I see it, is that the C1s are trying to take human beings completely out of the equation. Sales and customer service are two of those areas where machines may never replace humans.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
mvlandsw n012944 mvlandsw How many trains, maintenance crews, and miles of track do the Lake States' dispatchers deal with? Irrelevant. Why is it irrevelant? People with greater responsibilities usually get higher pay.
Why is it irrevelant? People with greater responsibilities usually get higher pay.
Dispatchers aren't piece work employees.
According to their website, they have 375 miles of track, from Plymouth through its headquarters in Saginaw, up to Gaylord and Alpena. Lines also run to Midland, Bay City, and Paines.
The line from Plymouth to Saginaw is the former CSX Saginaw Sub (nee Chessie, C&O, and Pere Marquette). There might be a more than a couple trains a day on it, but not much, from what I've seen during visits.
.
Euclid Backshop Convicted One I personally believe it's rooted in capitalism's dependence upon constant growth for survival, just the nature of the beast. Yet it doesn't appear that the railroads are concerned with growth, just profit margin. There is not much that railroads can do regarding growing the business, which requires the growth and/or additions of new customers, or in general, the growth of the economy. If there are multiple rail routes for some shipping, railroads might try to lure customers away from their usual routing. But the main way for railroads to grow is by becoming more profitable by lowering their costs. Every business should constantly strive to grow by any means possible. This is because businesses are founded on investment to pay for capital such as railroad tracks and locomotives. There is always a risk of losing that capital investment because unpredictable external conditions can abruptly kill a business, and lose the capital investment. That is the risk of capitalism. The investors take that risk and they are compensated for that risk by profit on their investment. This is entirely logical and fair. Nobody is being victimized by it. So with business always facing the threat of losing everything and making the investors poorer than when they started, it is logical to always do as much as possible to make money.
Backshop Convicted One I personally believe it's rooted in capitalism's dependence upon constant growth for survival, just the nature of the beast. Yet it doesn't appear that the railroads are concerned with growth, just profit margin.
Convicted One I personally believe it's rooted in capitalism's dependence upon constant growth for survival, just the nature of the beast.
I personally believe it's rooted in capitalism's dependence upon constant growth for survival, just the nature of the beast.
Yet it doesn't appear that the railroads are concerned with growth, just profit margin.
Forget growing the business; the Class 1's are actively shedding business if they don't think the profit margins are big enough. Besides that, as Jeff points out, short lines prove day-in and day-out that there's more business to be had if you put in the effort. I think the problem is that the C1s grew fat and happy carrying bulk commodities, and now that some of those commodities are going away they don't want to bother with lower-margin business.
I really think the C1s are heading for re-regulation because they're blatantly neglecting their common carrier responsibilities.
charlie hebdo dpeltier charlie hebdo And that's what increasingly wild capitalism looks like: unrestrained by collective labor or regulations. What a bizarre thing to say about the railroad industry, which is more unionized and more regulated than almost any other I can think of (utilities being the one exception that comes to mind). Dan If you don't believe me, read Balt's or zugmann 's vivid descriptions. The rail unions are weak and regulation of the work environment is also.
dpeltier charlie hebdo And that's what increasingly wild capitalism looks like: unrestrained by collective labor or regulations. What a bizarre thing to say about the railroad industry, which is more unionized and more regulated than almost any other I can think of (utilities being the one exception that comes to mind). Dan
charlie hebdo And that's what increasingly wild capitalism looks like: unrestrained by collective labor or regulations.
And that's what increasingly wild capitalism looks like: unrestrained by collective labor or regulations.
What a bizarre thing to say about the railroad industry, which is more unionized and more regulated than almost any other I can think of (utilities being the one exception that comes to mind).
If you don't believe me, read Balt's or zugmann 's vivid descriptions. The rail unions are weak and regulation of the work environment is also.
BNSF has asked its officers (which includes me) not to offer the internet our opinions on labor issues right now, which makes sense to me. So please don't put make assumptions about my stance on any given issue, as your assumptions are likely to be wrong and I can't correct you. But as a factual matter, railroads workers are far more heavily unionized compared to other private industry in the US*, and based on my own experience and that of others I know who have experience in and out of the industry, there is far more regulation and enforcement directed at employee safety in the railroad industry than is typical in other heavy industry.
So using railroads as your example of untrammeled capitalism is really misguided.
* 6.1% of the private labor force in the USA is unionized, as of 2021. The figure I found on the internet for the "transportation and warehousing" sector was 14.7%. According to AAR, in the railroad industry that number is 84%.
One other thing. The railroads, has shown in the quote Balt had from the PEB, say labor doesn't share risks during down times. They sure do. At the slightest hint of a downturn the railroads are ready to slash jobs and cut off people. That's one reason they have trouble hiring and holding onto people.
Jeff
I have mentioned over the past few years many opprotunities that one class one carrier passed up on. Some where being developed by local management and was shot down at higher levels. Some required very minimal investment by the railroad, almost all of the new business could have moved in existing trains. No new trains or more employees needed. One proposal only required the railroad provide engines and crews, the customer had their own car fleet, and would've been running shuttle grain trains from elevators on an underutilized branch line network to a central location on that network.
They want growth only if there is no risk to the operating ratio. They like squeezing another penny out of the dollars they have, rather then trying to get more dollars in their hand.
A few years ago, a short line leased part of a branch line up in the Iowa grain lines. The head of the short line was the keynote speaker at one of my historical groups. Before speaking about the historical subject, he gave an update about his company and their operations. He said that on that branch line, they had done in 3 months the same level of business that the class one had done in the preceding 3 years.
Their is business out there the railroads could have and make money on. But even though they could make money, it's not enough in their calculations. It's not enough to just be profitable anymore.
EuclidWhat causes the railroad environment to generate this "us versus them" mentality?
I would opine it's one of the few industries that hasn't inserted a huge buffer of middle managers between boss and laborer.
But that's just my guess.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
BackshopYet it doesn't appear that the railroads are concerned with growth, just profit margin.
Regrettably way outside the parameters of what I suspect Mr Otte would want us talking about here (to explain in adequate detail) but the comment I made to Charlie earlier about an industry's needs changing as it matures, is part of the paradox you point out.
Realizing the orchard is only so large, the growth they see as attainable comes from squeezing the oranges harder.
PEBFrom page 32.. "The Carriers maintain that capital investment and risk are the reasons for their profits, not any contributions by labor. The Carriers further argue that there is no correlation historically between high profits and higher compensation, either in the freight rail industry or more generally. To the contrary, one of the Carriers’ experts maintained that the most profitable companies are not those whose compensation is the highest. The Carriers assert that since employees have been fairly and adequately paid for their efforts and do not share in the downside risks if the operations are less profitable, then they have no claim to share in the upside either."
"The Carriers maintain that capital investment and risk are the reasons for their profits, not any contributions by labor. The Carriers further argue that there is no correlation historically between high profits and higher compensation, either in the freight rail industry or more generally. To the contrary, one of the Carriers’ experts maintained that the most profitable companies are not those whose compensation is the highest. The Carriers assert that since employees have been fairly and adequately paid for their efforts and do not share in the downside risks if the operations are less profitable, then they have no claim to share in the upside either."
Us v Them - right from the Presidential Emergency Board
There is significance in how the word "we" is used internal to any organization.
When it's a collective "we", that you know you are a part of, it's comforting. But the first time you hear the expression used in an exclusory context...you soon realize that the corporate bottom-line will trump your own priorities, every time.
I really don't think that mentality is peculiar to the railroad. I just think it may look that way to someone who has spent the balance of their career working for one.
I believe there are "harsh realities" to just about every business, they are just not readily evident to non-members. There is an old saying about how sausages are made, that I see as having relevance here.
There are official "above the board" policies that most would regard as textbook, or boiler plate philosophies that upstanding corporations are expected to adhere to. And then there are the realities just beneath the surface. "This is how we make our money" is one catch-all phrase I've head used to defend such practices. And I'm not saying such practices are either evil nor illegal. They just aren't the kinds of things you see featured in the company brochure.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.