While there are 1,700 railroad "Firers" (Fireman?) still active in 2014, their numbers are declining per the MSN.COM below. My question, does BNSF or other RR still have 3 man crews (Engineer, Fireman, Conductor?) That is, taking this news item to the logical conclusion.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/careersandeducation/30-jobs-that-are-quickly-disappearing-in-the-us/ss-BBu15DY?li=BBnbfcN#image=21
I suspect that 1700 is the number of engineers that still have rights to return to firing if they can't hold an engineer's position. When that occurred on CSX where I worked they quickly added an engineer's extra board position to avoid having 3 man crews. There are probably few if any people actually working as fireman except on steam tourist railroads.
Mark
The only 3 and/or 4 man crews I have seen in the 21st Century are those that have trainee Conductor and/or Engineers. There is no provision for a 'Fireman' on the computer generated trainsheet, indicative that the company has no Fireman jobs, even though individuals may hold Fireman seniority.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
The only time we (UP) have a "fireman" is when someone is training to be an engineer. On our computerized boards, pool turns for engineers show a fireman's position that is marked as "blanked". They can assign someone to it, when training for example, but the vacancy is not filled under normal circumstances. If there is a reduction in the number of working engineers, the set-back engineers don't become fireman, they go back to being trainmen.
Our road conductors have the same for the brakeman's position. The position is normally blanked unless they have someone training.
I imagine BNSF is the same in regards to fireman.
Jeff
No Firemen left on CN, although our crew calling system still has the code for them and the ability to add one to a crew remains. This is because that system was developed in the late 80s/early 90s and at that time there were still some old Engineers working who could only be cut back to Firemen when unable to hold an Engineer's job, not Conductor or Trainman. By now all these men have grown old enough to retire and have done so.
I would note that CN came to an agreement with the Unions to deal with the issue of Firemen on diesels (featherbedding) earlier than many American railroads, I read through our Agreements on this once and if memory serves correctly the agreement was signed in the mid 1960s, all remaining Firemen had gone through Engineer training by 1975 (if not earlier) and normally worked as Engineers after that, only being cut back to Firemen when traffic slowed and cutbacks were made. As always older heads kept retiring and seeing anyone cut back to Fireman was rare by 1980, but did not become impossible until the last of the affected men retired in the 90s/early 00s, hence the inclusion of Firemen in the computer system. I am unsure of the date of the last trip worked by a Fireman but even in 1980 traffic would probably have had to drop by 75-90% for a couple weeks to see anyone get cut back.
Our system also has separate codes for Engineer Trainees and the Second Engineer on an assignment, who under the Agreement may/must be called on certain assignments that will work extremely long hours (think worktrains or wreck cleanup jobs), although I have never actually seen a Second Engineer get called; the hours of service restrictions may have made this unnecessary.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Locals, rd switchers and work trains are required by union crew consist agreement to have a three person crew.Hopefully the UTU will not give this away. With no more brkmn xtra brds anymore, this reduces the amount of mainline trains w/ a 05 brkmn position
SFbrkmnLocals, rd switchers and work trains are required by union crew consist agreement to have a three person crew.Hopefully the UTU will not give this away. With no more brkmn xtra brds anymore, this reduces the amount of mainline trains w/ a 05 brkmn position
Must be a Local Agreement in your area of operation. Not in the National Agreement. On my carrier all are 2 man crews except the ones that have trainees. The Remote Control Yard Jobs are all a 1 man crew.
BaltACD SFbrkmn Locals, rd switchers and work trains are required by union crew consist agreement to have a three person crew.Hopefully the UTU will not give this away. With no more brkmn xtra brds anymore, this reduces the amount of mainline trains w/ a 05 brkmn position Must be a Local Agreement in your area of operation. Not in the National Agreement. On my carrier all are 2 man crews except the ones that have trainees. The Remote Control Yard Jobs are all a 1 man crew.
SFbrkmn Locals, rd switchers and work trains are required by union crew consist agreement to have a three person crew.Hopefully the UTU will not give this away. With no more brkmn xtra brds anymore, this reduces the amount of mainline trains w/ a 05 brkmn position
On the UP, some parts of the railroad still have brakemen on locals, work trains, and some manifests that do a specified amount of work by contract. It depends on the original property and the contract they had before being acquired. I think the exSP and original UP fall under this. I don't know about the exMKT and exMP. The exCNW doesn't, the CNW was able to remove the requirement for brakemen and some switchmen (helper, not the foreman). On the exCNW, some jobs do have a brakeman/switchman but it's at the sole discretion of the company. There's no contractual requirement.
I've heard that some parts of the proposed contract on part of the BNSF (the one allowing for engineer only trains and a "master" conductor in PTC territory) would also have eliminated brakemen and switchmen helpers on that part of the BNSF. (That "part" I believe was mostly the old BN side.) It would have eliminated a lot of jobs whether PTC was operational or if conductors were mandated by FRA regulation.
[quote user="SD70M-2Dude"]
[/quote/
i went to to work on Penn Central in 1971 as a fireman in late February 1974 I was talking with my crew Engr, conductor head brakeman and rear brakeman when the road foreman walked though then stopped.......hey Jim........when did you graduate the New Haven Engineers school?
My reply......I didn't. Why not? He asked upset like.
You never ordered me there I replied.
Then we have a problem. What I asked.
i'm going to promote you in about three weeks!!!!
See me in my office in one hour. I guess I'm not heading west then.
Three weeks later I was notified by the chief crew dispatcher that I was promoted March 9 1974. My first train west was a freight and after10 hours at the Y we got called out for an extra east no power out of the engine fuel pad the jeep took us to the hump receiving yard and I was told my train was coming in on track one. I as usual had a roadforeman with us as this was my first eastbound as an Engineer, I had one the day before on my first westbound freight Imagine my surprise this was at night when I see passenger cars behind the freight power 62 different cars from the early 1920's to the 40's. With that old equipment you had to make a service reduction of a minimum of 12 pounds in order to be reasonably assured the brakes would release completely. It was the Barnum and Baily Red Train!!!
The Barnum and Baily Red circus train they actually have two complete circuses one Red and the other Blue. It was a interesting way to run my first eastbound train and no a problem was not had.
oh yeah the look on the face of the Roadforeman was classic when I said you never ordered me to the engineers school absolute shock.
And that is how I had engineers senior to me and junior to me all who attended the Engineers school and I was the only one who qualified the old school way In the 70's.
I miss the old days engineers belong on yard switchers I have heard of a number of times where a remote controlled switcher sideswiped or ran into another train while yard switching. No remote control system or PTC system is going to eliminate a set of mark one eyeballs on a locomotive or prevent that from happening In myho.
Blackcloud 5229 I miss the old days engineers belong on yard switchers I have heard of a number of times where a remote controlled switcher sideswiped or ran into another train while yard switching. No remote control system or PTC system is going to eliminate a set of mark one eyeballs on a locomotive or prevent that from happening In myho.
I agree. Beltpak has it's place in this world and that place is shoving cars over a hump, nothing more. Doesn't help that no one wants to work our Beltpak jobs so you always wind up with the junior, inexperienced guys on them, which when combined with the usual asanine railroad management leads to some interesting situations.
Like the 3-man yard crew (Foreman, Switchman & Trainee; the 3 combined had probably 2 years of service) whose GP9 kept tripping its high-crankcase pressure warning button. The Trainmaster's solution (which not knowing any better they followed) was to have the Trainee stand beside the engine and hold the button in so it couldn't trip and shut the engine down. I've never been witness to a crankcase explosion but from photos of them it is very lucky that this crew did not experience one either, or they would very likely need another Trainee.
Or in the same yard a couple years later a crew with a little bit more experience is given a locomotive consist with worn out brakeshoes to start their shift. They complain repeatedly throughout the day, but the Trainmaster tells them to keep working with it as apparently no other power was available, and promises that the units will be given new brakeshoes when they are serviced at the end of the shift. So the boys play through the pain and finally come to the last move of the day: pull ~60 grain loads out of one track and shove them into another. The Trainmaster insists that they move the cars bled off (air brakes disabled), leaving only the by now non-existent unit brakes to control them. The crew objects, requesting to cut the air in to the cars so they can use their brakes, TM says no. Crew pulls uphill out of the yard, stopping relatively easily of course and then proceeds to shove downhill into the bowl. As speed increases a moderate engine brake is applied, to no effect. A full engine brake is applied, to no effect. Emergency braking is applied, to no effect. The only effective stopping mechanism that day was the other train they sideswiped and ran into on the lead at the other end of the yard, making quite the pile of wrecked grain cars. Pigeons were very happy.
Those are but 2 of the many stories from that yard, but there are many more from that location, and many more yards across the railroad, and many more railroads across the continent...
And I have always thought that you need 3 men on a yard crew to switch efficiently: one person to watch the point when pulling back (usually the Engineer), one to kick cars and the third to line switches & lace up the tracks.
SD70M-2Dude Blackcloud 5229 I miss the old days engineers belong on yard switchers I have heard of a number of times where a remote controlled switcher sideswiped or ran into another train while yard switching. No remote control system or PTC system is going to eliminate a set of mark one eyeballs on a locomotive or prevent that from happening In myho. I agree. Beltpak has it's place in this world and that place is shoving cars over a hump, nothing more. Doesn't help that no one wants to work our Beltpak jobs so you always wind up with the junior, inexperienced guys on them, which when combined with the usual asanine railroad management leads to some interesting situations. Like the 3-man yard crew (Foreman, Switchman & Trainee; the 3 combined had probably 2 years of service) whose GP9 kept tripping its high-crankcase pressure warning button. The Trainmaster's solution (which not knowing any better they followed) was to have the Trainee stand beside the engine and hold the button in so it couldn't trip and shut the engine down. I've never been witness to a crankcase explosion but from photos of them it is very lucky that this crew did not experience one either, or they would very likely need another Trainee. Or in the same yard a couple years later a crew with a little bit more experience is given a locomotive consist with worn out brakeshoes to start their shift. They complain repeatedly throughout the day, but the Trainmaster tells them to keep working with it as apparently no other power was available, and promises that the units will be given new brakeshoes when they are serviced at the end of the shift. So the boys play through the pain and finally come to the last move of the day: pull ~60 grain loads out of one track and shove them into another. The Trainmaster insists that they move the cars bled off (air brakes disabled), leaving only the by now non-existent unit brakes to control them. The crew objects, requesting to cut the air in to the cars so they can use their brakes, TM says no. Crew pulls uphill out of the yard, stopping relatively easily of course and then proceeds to shove downhill into the bowl. As speed increases a moderate engine brake is applied, to no effect. A full engine brake is applied, to no effect. Emergency braking is applied, to no effect. The only effective stopping mechanism that day was the other train they sideswiped and ran into on the lead at the other end of the yard, making quite the pile of wrecked grain cars. Pigeons were very happy. Those are but 2 of the many stories from that yard, but there are many more from that location, and many more yards across the railroad, and many more railroads across the continent... And I have always thought that you need 3 men on a yard crew to switch efficiently: one person to watch the point when pulling back (usually the Engineer), one to kick cars and the third to line switches & lace up the tracks.
third call I got west as an engineer was a traprock extra 12 miles west was where we picked up trap rock from a pit 218 feet higher than the mainline 2 passing tracks each holding 60 cars on the east end was two switches one for the other track and the easterly switch lined you for the track going to the pit a curving grade of 6 %!!! Power ALCO RS-3 maximum 12 cars going up. Coming down all cars had the retaining valve set in hp position before coming down when everything was going right you came down pulling the train about 1/2 mph usually took a 12 hour shift to get all 100 empties loaded and somethings you blew up the hours of service but we made it back to the yard with 100 loaded trap rock cars ( that MOW uses to lay down additional ballast to the track ) . 5 weeks later a engineer lost it coming down with 12 loaded cars and went off the runoff track one ALCO RS-3 on its side in a ravine 100 feet below the mainline nose into a stream Hulcher pulled it out in less than 24 hours and surprising everyone it was back in service 6 months laterGot called next morning for a trap rock work train extras west, yup, the cars I loaded the day before power? GP-38-2 2000 hp and a GE U-28B 2800 hp which was a royal pain in the butt. the U-28B was GE's second production engine domestically and while a very good power GE put a reducing plate into the governor in an attempt to minimize excess black smoke complaints they got with the U-25B. After tiying onto 60 cars to double over to track 17 to make up our train after getting the go east sign released the engine brake and opened the throt to the second notch pulled out the slack and stopped in the second notch advance to third notch still standin........still not moving.........hymmmmmm looked back at second engine no smoke still not moving applied full engine brake throttle still in notch three isolated the GP.....walk back to the GE it's loading and very slowly still accelerating very very slowly. I timed it, it took over 5 minutes to reach full throttle rpm wise THEN it would load to full power. This was fine in a 3 or 4 unit power consist. Not so good as a 1 or 2 unit consist. My next trip west after arriving at the engine service track I went into the shop and spoke to the Shop Foreman who called in his chief electrician and I explained the prob from the week before with the U-28B.
You sure it just wasn't cold?
Nope it was at 160 F l asked if he knew about the resrictor plate that GE installed at the factory to minimize smoke? He didn't know about it. I suggested replacing it with the plate from a U-25 and the foreman said he had one of those units was coming into the shop and why don't we take a walk and see if we can recreate the problem? It responded the same way as the unit I had a week earlier. Two months later I get called out extra west. Three U-28B's oh joy I thought on seeing them. Surprising me the lead unit responded like a U-25 instant throttle little puff of smoke and up came engine rpm and power unfortunately the two traili units hadn't been upgraded yet so we're very slow to respond was rolling west with 135 emptys at 10 miles an hour in the 8'th notch and slowly we built up speed. We got held at a control point to wait out four east bounds so I walked back and opened the governor access door fresh paint on the governor stating " U-28 governor using a U-25 resrictor plate gov set to U-28 fuel rack settings ". It made as much smoke as a U-25 but I didn't care it responded now to throttle command which is what counts. once under load the turbo would pickup and 99% of the smoke would disappear.
Ahhh the trials and tribulations of the old days.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.