Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl [quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal [quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl [quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal A point about crew size reductions: Such action didn't add any new business, but it also didn't take any business away, did it? Crew size reductions didn't cause lower average velocity. Maybe it increased terminal dwell time somewhat when having to walk the consist prior to departure, but nothing major. Did crew size reductions result in lower morale, which on the public face seemed to make rail crews disenfranchised to the railroad's business clients? My point is the railroads seemed to be focussing all their energies to getting labor concessions, when they should have focussed their energies on approaching the theoretical speed advantage of rail vs highway. Expedient transport is a business draw, grumpy employees is a business repellent. [/quote] So now we're back to the "didn't it" and "maybe" type statements. More guesswork from Dave.[/quote] The "didn't it" and "maybe" statements were put forth with the hope that someone else might want to engage in this conversation. [sigh] [quote]QUOTE: Working for a company that's obviously ready to go belly up isn't exactly good for the morale, either. Which also explains why they didn't invest money into improvements for increasing speeds, they didn't have money for that, any more than they had money for excess crew members. [/quote] Again with the claim that all the rail companies were ready to go belly up if they didn't reduce crew sizes. Not so. The crew size reductions did not add one cent to the profit line, and without increased profits you will go belly up. The idea of trying to achieve financial success by cutting out labor and tearing out trackage is a fool's dream. If anything, the latter two reasons are why the railroads almost went "belly up" if indeed that was the case as you infer. Neither action adds one red cent to the profit line. On the contrary, lopping off assets such as trackage and labor means you are getting rid of the key "multiplier" components that expand business reach and thus increases profit. We've all read enough of how railroad management seemed to prefer getting out of railroading rather than making the type of revenue generating investments necessary for success. One cannot equate this irrational behaviour with general business guidelines. [/quote] And again you try to misquote what I said to lead to your own misguided conclusions.[/quote] Pot calling the kettle black again. [quote]QUOTE: Railroads needed to reduce costs. Reduction of the number of people on the payroll was ONE of the ways they did this. The profit line wasn't one they were concerned with, they didn't have one. They were trying to reduce the loss line. Only a fool of a company would hang on to assets that are no longer producing the profits to even offset the cost of having them. Now I suppose you'll tell us that no company ever sold off or abandoned a factory they no longer needed. Or tore it down for the scrap value of it. Or laid off employees during a business downturn. Only a fool keeps paying these costs when they no longer are producing. Unfortunately, you're looking at the events of 30+ years ago with the knowledge of today, but since you're so young, I guess that's understandable. Business decisions are made with the knowledge at the time the decisions were made. To invest in infrastructure, the company has to 1) be convinced that there is a future for the business and 2) have the money to invest in such improvements. You can't spend what you don't have, and you can't get loans without convincing the people giving you the loan that they'll get their money back, with interest. But I guess only someone versed in economics would know this. [/quote] Again, reducing "costs" does not add one red cent to the profit line. And if you are looking at assets as "costs", then you are in big trouble as a business. Just because the railroads failed to utilize their assets such as labor and trackage doesn't mean those assets were no longer assets, it just means someone in management wasn't doing their job. The railroads did a miserable job of asset utilization. Perhaps the worst in the history of US business.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag