Railroad Labor Strife Is Very Solvable!

[edblysard]

Ok, I"ll quit while y'all are ahead....

[Saxman]

Ed,

Don't tempt me's.



Saxman and the Cracked Reeds

[edblysard]

Hey, if the rest of "you" play, you could start you own big band!!!

[Saxman]

Ed,

Preach it brother! In regards to my schizophrenic reply. Yes both of me agreed at the same time. I am now trying to get my other 24 personalities to come on board.

Saxman

[edblysard]

Dont know about you, but I dont see any resolution untill it becomes economicaly profitabl to both parties to work together. Right now, each sees themselvs as the one "making the money" and the other side sees itself as "earning the money". In the last 175 years, neither one has budged and inch, why should they? Both feel as if they earn the money they are entitled to, both feel as if they ar e "running" the railroad. Dont hold your breath waiting for anything to change. Me, I'll just keep pounding rocks....

[Anonymous]

If whoever started this thread thinks that this strife is so very solvable, why don't they just bounce their little a** on over to a contract negotiation and make everything all better. I hate it when people oversimplify stuff that they probably arent even involved in......

[edblysard]

You mean the guys who actually make the train move dont really see the big big picture? Their money, our sweat?

[edblysard]

Did both of you realize that at the same time?

Sybil

[edblysard]

Did both of you realize that at the same time?

[Anonymous]

Here's reality, pal. The companies refuse to talk about ANYTHING! They just show up to go through the motions. Then, the unions go on strike. Two or three days later, the US orders them back to work. Binding arbitration shoves stuff down our throats. We have to swallow. Of course, now it's different. Now, the UTU, having sold out half of its membership, agrees to sell out the engineers with the "black box" along with some other stuff. They then settle with the carriers. This new UTU/carrier agreement sets a "pattern", or "framework" for contracts. Thus the engineers are forced to take an agreement based on the UTU agreement. But really, all these unions are junk; my dues are just a tax to allow me to work. The General Chairman for the BLE on my carrier lives far away, where the carrier maintains its headquarters. His kids date their kids; he golfs with them at the same clubs; shoot, he lives in the same neighborhoods with them. And why not? He makes just as much as most of them do. In other words, they are all "working closely together." So there is your reality, son. It will all work out if we can all just see the economic intricacies. Right!

[Saxman]

Being a person who has had the "privilege" of being in management and returning to being an engineer, I don't think nuts is the word to describe the relationship between management and the union. Try schzophrenic.

[Saxman]

Being a person who has had the "privilege" of being in management and returning to being an engineer, I don't think nuts is the word to describe the relationship between management and the union. Try schzophrenic.

[edblysard]

You have been around them too,,silly, arnt they.

[edblysard]

Where I work, they would sit there and argue as to who had to move first, and who was going get fired for letting them both sit on the rails.
(sitting, standing or stepping on the railhead is against one of the GCOR rules, it isnt safe!)And neither one would point out the boxcar to the other, because the other "side" wouldnt belive them in the first place. Nuts, isnt it?

[Saxman]

My vote is that they will focus on each other.

[croteaudd]

“And they will happily sit there … while their industry dies of inertia.” Happily or growling is debatable, but … Picture management sitting on one rail, labor across four feet and some inches on the other. A loose boxcar is rolling toward them. Once someone points out the danger to both, would wisdom take over, or would they prefer to still focus on each other?

[edblysard]

But you see, railroading has its own culture, with two sub cultures. The railroad culture has been this way since the beginning, and it dosnt want any outsiders looking in, its a closed society, very much like IBM. Even though labor and managment disagree on almost every point, they both agree that they like things the way they are, and dont want anyone to try to change anything. The sub cultures are of course the labor culture, with its own odd rituals and code of behaviors, and managments culture, with it strict codes and old management styles. Neither side will change, because it is profitable to both to remain static. The railroad culture relies on the collective bargianing agreements to operate almost outside the laws and rules which goveren every other business. Because railroads are still seen by most people to be public utilities, regulated by the goverment, instead of proffit driven publicly owened business, abuses from both cultures abound. Name me one other business which is allowed to require it employees to work eight hours, with only a 20 minute lunch break? Or twelve hrs with only two such breaks. Where else can you find employees who can be ordered to work every 8 hours, with only 8 hours off between shifts? So why does the labor culture allow such "abuse"? Because the money is good when you work like that. Management likes it this way too, because they dont have to follow the rules of behaviour managers of business have to. The view that train crews are nothing more than expendable and replacable equipment has been there so long, its ingrained into almost every decision they make.
Progressive disipline dosnt exsist. Any officer can fire you for almost any reason they choose. And because both cultures operate outside of regular business rules, and because seniority is a driving factor in almost everything, often the people running things on both sides are not the best qualified, only the oldest. It is almost a feudal culture, with power given not to the best, but to the guys who stick around the longest. And both sides still act as if, because the railroads have been here forever, it will allways be here, forever. Neither side will ever budge an inch, for fear of losing the power they have within this culture. Ever notice that women make up such a small percentage of railroaders? Both cultures try to run off any woman who trys to join. Ever notice that MOW crews are almost all blacks, while trains crews are slowly intergrating? Change at a railroad is almost impossible to create. Both sides will spend more energy and effort resisting change, even changes that are good for everyone, because their respective cultures forbid change at all. And they will happily sit there, each accuseing the other of trying to cheat one or the other out of money, while their industry dies of inertia.

[Saxman]

J,

Your comments are on the mark. Coming to this board should be a source of information and a form of relaxation from the insanity of our everyday work world.

[wabash1]

i think it is due to the fact we argue with managment all day why come here to argue with other managment type on are off time. the just of the matter is managment might mean well and have great intentions. but have no clue to reality. and to do the work of 3 with 1 guy is asking for trouble. lost production and higher cost. and the people who do the most complaining are teh guys who want to keep the jobs we have. not becouse rcl might be better it is becouse we are better.but it wont matter the old heads will have the jobs the new guys will be on the street.

[Jackflash]

wonder why this one died so fast it was just
getting interesting

[Jackflash]

Yes I know about the dead engine feature, we were
taught that this is used when you couldnt MU
the main reservior hoses between a good operating
locomotive and one that was dead in tow, such as
if the dead engine was back in the train not
coupled to the operating consist. I know when
doing this with a dead locomotive with electro-
pneumatic brakes you must open up the AR and
ACT. MU hoses to the atmosphere, this is
interesting, food for thought. thanks jackflash

[Saxman]

Jackflash,

My problem with the MUing practice on my railroad was the possibility of the engine brakes not releasing properly after an automatic brake pipe reduction as they may become over charged from the main reservior. Also the chance of run-in as these locomotives would set up differently than the trailing cars. Remember this practice was adopted after a trainmaster convinced those above him that the train delays were from MUing locomotives. Never mind there were other problems such as: cars not ready by carmen, B/O's to kick out of the pick up, waiting for yard assignments to clear and crossing the yard to the engine house to get the engines and return to the train. (I spent WAY to much time tracking the delays to this train.)

With that said, I would MU the locomotives the proper way when picking up on line. Brake Pipe, Main reservoir, Independent Apply and Release and Actuating and trailing units cut-out and in trail.

To "haul it as a box car" one really needs to use the dead engine feature. One of the key points of this is that the compressor of the locomotive is off line. Also, the main reservoirs are drained and then will be filled to 40 lbs less than brake pipe through the dead engine feature. Reducing the chance of over charging and not releasing fully.

To close, while building my case, I called Westinghouse Air Brake. They agreed with my summation and recommended that locomotives be MUed properly unless there is an air brake problem then use the dead engine feature.

After I tracked the locomotive that had the thermal cracks on the wheels back to being picked up three days prior at this particular terminal, a circular came down to stop this practice. I had only one call that said: "You know, I think you were right." To late boys and girls I am back in the seat and it is another Road Foreman's turn in the barrel.

[Anonymous]

Bobbishna, first, if you don't work for the RR keep your opinion to yourself. I too worked in a union shop (I'm very pro-union) and it was nothing like it is on the RR. Sure you would like to work on the RR for a few years, most train dazzled foamers would. That "If you don't like it move on," statement is ignorant. Some of these guys are close to retirement and that may be all that they have done. Is there no respect for a man that can hold the same job for 30 years? Most of these college grad types change jobs very often. That cheese and whine statement was over the top. That is a direct shot at somebody and is not needed. This is the exact reason why many of us rails don't like foamers! You speak out of turn.

[wabash1]

sure is easy to judge someone when you have no idea what they are talking about. did i say i hated my job. Ill answer that for you NO... i would not work 75 days without a day off if i didnt. But if i work to cover the cry babies you saw me write about, and needed a day off and couldnt get it, well i wont do any favors for that boss again. end of statement. and i am not the only one who this has happened to. And as far as you thinking it is a job for young men that is the ones all railroads are having problems with 90% of them wont work. but since you are a 9-5 union man you wouldnt have any idea of what i am talking about. as for the cheese ill take it it will go good with the ham.

[Anonymous]

Let me say right off, I do NOT work for any railroad. I am, a "blue-collar" union man though. I know how management can, and will mistreat their employees. But, I don't think that anyone is holding a gun to your head forcing you to work on the railroad. If you don't like it, move on. I myself would like to work on the RR, but probably not make a lifelong career out of it. This seems to be a job for young men. I would most likely put in about ten years, then get out. Sure, I moan and complain about my current job too, but if it gets THAT bad, I'll move on. I have a nice plate of cheese to go with your whine.

[Jackflash]

Read your posting concerning MU of dead or B/O
locomotives, as stated, this was the way
I've been taught to do it. ie, set it up for
lead/cut out and connect the main reservior
lines, you say this is wrong, how would you
do it. thanks, jackflash

[wabash1]

I am avalible and work for the most part 7 days a week. i just went thru my time book and it is 70 to 75 days before i get a day off. I dont care who marks off, I figure if i put that kind of service in i should get a day when i need it. But us guys working like this cant get days off when needed couse you have regular cry babies. who the bosses pamper and give all the breaks to. I needed off for personal reasons and in 75 days that I worked there was 2 times i needed 1 day each . i was told i could be let off that he needed the man power. only 7 men on the off board at 730am in the morning i wasnt allowed off. by that afternoon 15 guys on the off board and the next day add 6 more, Then he has the balls to come to me 4 months later and apologize for his oversight that he didnt look at my work history and should have given me the day off. My reply was simple what is done is done, I Dont care if your trains get moved, I dont care what others do, Just dont come to me for any favors couse i wont do any. and walked away.I missed 2 funerals this year and a grand baby getting born becouse of him. And that is just this boss. us guys who keep a low profile get screwed on a regular basis, So i work by the rule book, takes more time yes. i dont get relieved couse i always make it in. In other words i do my job, And you are right i am tired of the back room agreements that both sides do in violation of the agreement.

[Anonymous]

What kind of medication are you on???

[Saxman]

J,

Look yourself in the mirror and answer truthfully this question: It is ALWAYS mangements fault and I have never participated in anything that could be looked at as job delaying tactics? Your statement: "It is so much fun to break in a new trainmaster" pretty well gives me the answer. As you point your finger at management, stop and look at how many are pointing at you!

Now before you jump to conclusion that I am not a "rail" and do not understand, Yes I am! And, I am sick to death of the tactics by BOTH sides. Also, I have been on both sides as a Road Foreman and brakeman, conductor and engineer.

Examples:

One year I did not receive my signing bonus on the contract. I contacted my local UTU chairman. His answer was: "You are now in management and will get it when you come back to the ground." Fact was, I was on special assignment with the rules department. I contacted the head of Rules and training. He made a few phone calls and low and behold, I got my money. And from the "enemy" at that. My over riding question has always been: Who told payroll not to pay my signing bonus? I can only come to one conclusion.

One of my last battles as Road Foreman had to do with the proper way to MU "dead locomotives." Someone had convinced the uppers that the delay to a particular train was the engeineers MUing B/O power at a particular terminal. Well a plan was deviesed to only connect the brake pipe and main reservior line, cut out the automatic and leave the independent in lead. I stated my opposition to this and gave the reasons why. I was told this is what the GM wanted and we would make it work. Needless to say a report came back that a locomotive was found with thermal cracks. I traced it back to this particular terminal two days prior and being P/U there. This practice stopped shortly there after.

Only one sided huh?