Ulrich wrote: A pension huh? nuff said...
A pension huh? nuff said...
Ya know, what they give you for years of service to retire with? For folks like you, it's every man for himself.
Ulrich wrote: Yes indeed..more tonnage..more employees...more route miles...but not as profitable...and as an investor profit is all I care about. So why the wide cabs if not for safety?
Yes indeed..more tonnage..more employees...more route miles...but not as profitable...and as an investor profit is all I care about. So why the wide cabs if not for safety?
There you have it. Who cares how many people die, or how many are injured, or how many rivers get polluted, as long as I make my profit.
Ulrich wrote:And I wouldn't have it any other way... As I see it I'm pretty satisfied with my lot...yet you guys aren't so happy with yours. But I truly hope it all works out for you. Lots of nice people work for the railroads...I know quite a few.
And I bet every one of those nice people you know who work for the railroads have at one time or another complained, griped, etc about their employer. Maybe not to you, but to someone else.
Jeff
Ulrich wrote:So why did the railroads switch over to the more expensive wide cabs then..looks? CN has a good safety record and is working hard to improve certain problem areas. Keep in mind, also, that CN is a more complex far reaching operation that the others given that it is the only true transcontinental railroad...from Halifax to Vancouver/Prince Rupert and right down to the Gulf Coast. The other roads are basically super regionals.
If this hasn't been answered before, CN started with the wide cabs back when they were gov't owned and subsidized. They also has super-deluxe cabooses, too. I suspect they were requirements of the agreements that CN has with their conductors and engineers at the time.
The US roads went to the wide cabs for a few reasons. One was they wanted more and better space and better access for the equipment (cab signals, toilet, cut-out, uh, "valves") and the crew. The new crash standards were also a factor, although the old std cab could accomdate them.
I would argue that a better workspace and accomdations for the crew was not caused by altruism, but by self interest. The less likely it is for a crew to refuse to take power because of a defect, the better off the railroad is. Having hard to clean and maintain, smelly toilets was a major reason crews would refuse engines.
As for CN's "network". It's hard to call a giant 'T' a network. CN has a pretty simple game board compared to most others.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
enr2099 wrote: Our collective agreement says, I believe, six months training is required. CN is trying to say that the six months starts at the start of rules class, but apparently it is meant to be six months training as a helper/brakeman. Might be different for you guys back east though.
Our collective agreement says, I believe, six months training is required. CN is trying to say that the six months starts at the start of rules class, but apparently it is meant to be six months training as a helper/brakeman. Might be different for you guys back east though.
I was 6 months from the start of rules class. The kids training now are gettin 3 MAYBE 4 months on the trains before getting qualified. I am in a failry simply terminal here ... but the guys in Toronto and Edmonton ... There is no possible way you can learn the many subs and and the terminal in itself. It's pretty scary.
10000 feet and no dynamics? Today is going to be a good day ...
Ulrich wrote:No flame wars...but you maybe shouldn't flame your employer so openly on a public forum. They try hard and they don't deserve to be disrespected in that way. Hopefully things will work out. You have a nice evening...
I think they do. When you have a company who continues to disrespect it's workers, allows conditions to become so decrepit, then trys to blame the workers for it, I would say the truth should be known. This is not fairy tale railroading you proscribe to, but the reality. Sure, not all is dismal, yet those faced with the task of moving tonnage over a line which was not properly rebuilt, work in a yard which has more mud holding the rotted ties in place than ballast, or get on an engine fresh out of the shop with no working heaters, you would question things too. When it happens year after year, how can one not hold things in a negative light?
Just a question,
Does this acquisition mean CP gets all of DM&E? Just wondering...
CPRail modeler wrote: Just a question,Does this acquisition mean CP gets all of DM&E? Just wondering...
CP is seeking to acquire all of DM&E/IC&E.
enr2099 wrote: CN???? SAFE???? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!! Oh...that's too funny. A railway that's having major derailments almost everyday, a railway that killed the entire fish population of the Cheakamus River, oh yeah that's a real safe company. A company who's CEO is such greedy son of a b****, he's not spending any money on infrastructure. Locomotives and tracks are falling apart. I've seen abandoned railways in better shape than most of CN. Remember the bridge collapse on the BC North Line? Caused by Hunter's penny pinching. A multi-billion dollar railway and they're too cheap to make sure everyone has radios, to properly maintain locomotives and track and to provide employees with proper training. New employees with only 3 months training are being foreman/conductor qualified with absolutely no familiarzation or experience as a helper/brakeman.
CN???? SAFE???? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!! Oh...that's too funny. A railway that's having major derailments almost everyday, a railway that killed the entire fish population of the Cheakamus River, oh yeah that's a real safe company. A company who's CEO is such greedy son of a b****, he's not spending any money on infrastructure. Locomotives and tracks are falling apart. I've seen abandoned railways in better shape than most of CN. Remember the bridge collapse on the BC North Line? Caused by Hunter's penny pinching.
A multi-billion dollar railway and they're too cheap to make sure everyone has radios, to properly maintain locomotives and track and to provide employees with proper training. New employees with only 3 months training are being foreman/conductor qualified with absolutely no familiarzation or experience as a helper/brakeman.
Must be safe enought for your continued employment with them
http://www.youtube.com/user/pavabo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/paulvbox
Mr. Ulrich, many of us just really don't care about the company anymore. We are so sick of being trampled...they dont respect us, so we respond in kind. I have lost just about all pride in my job. It is sad, really.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Soo 6604 wrote: Must be safe enought for your continued employment with them
Oh, grow up!
What's a person to do once they have committed 10-20 years of their life to a company? Just quit? And then what? It's tough enough to get a job in the US as it is; much more difficult when you're 40 years old and only have railroading for experience. Not too many rails want to be saying, "You want fries with that?"
What is frustrating to rails is that the conditions we complain about are all solvable, they are all due to management's view of the operating department workers, and they put people's lives at risk. Indeed, both rail worker's and the general public's lives are threatened by shoddy maintenance practices.
Most managers that I have ever dealt with do not care about anything long-term. All they are concerned about is this year's bottom line, and did they bring their operations in at or under budget.
Why should they care anyway? The average tenure at a company these days for management-level employees is 2 to 3 years (see link below). They will be gone before the effects of their policies becomes apparent.
http://www.reedconsulting.co.uk/assets/files/pdf/EmpAtt.pdf
But as long as the brass are not held accountable for failures in the field, or have no consideration for those that do the actual work, it is doubtful that things will change.
I know that I am a first time poster and that this thread has strayed far from the original topic, but I do feel the need to say something. Ulrich, how about if you join a railroad then come back and talk. You have said a lot of things that come from a railfan's perspective. Why are you trying to have an argument with those that know what railroading really is like? It is not the "romantic" railroading that has been illustrated in books and magazines for years. Your previously mentioned railroader friends are not going to tell you all of the bad stuff that happens. It is a job. The friendship and brotherhood is unparalleled and there are fun times, but it is a job. Don't stick for the railroad when all of your views only come from being a railfan. Please think of this before you go back to speaking like you know how it all is.
I apologize for speaking my mind. I tend to get carried away sometimes. If I have been too harsh, I will delete this post.
EMDSD40-2 wrote: I know that I am a first time poster and that this thread has strayed far from the original topic, but I do feel the need to say something. Ulrich, how about if you join a railroad then come back and talk. You have said a lot of things that come from a railfan's perspective. Why are you trying to have an argument with those that know what railroading really is like? It is not the "romantic" railroading that has been illustrated in books and magazines for years. Your previously mentioned railroader friends are not going to tell you all of the bad stuff that happens. It is a job. The friendship and brotherhood is unparalleled and there are fun times, but it is a job. Don't stick for the railroad when all of your views only come from being a railfan. Please think of this before you go back to speaking like you know how it all is. I apologize for speaking my mind. I tend to get carried away sometimes. If I have been too harsh, I will delete this post.
No need to apologize. No harshness detected here. Actually, the post makes a good point.... The gulf that exists between some "rails" and "railfans" never seems to narrow sometimes.
EMDSD40-2 wrote:I know that I am a first time poster and that this thread has strayed far from the original topic, but I do feel the need to say something. Ulrich, how about if you join a railroad then come back and talk. You have said a lot of things that come from a railfan's perspective. Why are you trying to have an argument with those that know what railroading really is like? It is not the "romantic" railroading that has been illustrated in books and magazines for years. Your previously mentioned railroader friends are not going to tell you all of the bad stuff that happens. It is a job. The friendship and brotherhood is unparalleled and there are fun times, but it is a job. Don't stick for the railroad when all of your views only come from being a railfan. Please think of this before you go back to speaking like you know how it all is. I apologize for speaking my mind. I tend to get carried away sometimes. If I have been too harsh, I will delete this post.
It was a very good post....thanks for contributing!
While I know that the CN has had its share of mishaps in Canada, I haven't heard much about incidents here in the U.S. Also, being pretty familiar with CN's Iowa Division trackage; particularly between Dubuque and Waterloo and the Manchester - Cedar Rapids secondary main I haven't heard of anything really bad happening like some of the incidents in Canada. Then again, I don't get home to Iowa often enough either so hopefully someone can fill me in.
I can say my employer, CPRS, has a much better safety record than CN despite the recent mishap we had at River Junction (La Crescent) this last weekend. I remember when I started with CP back in '95 in Enderlin, North Dakota, the safety thing was really hammered into me from the get go.
Brian (IA) http://blhanel.rrpicturearchives.net.
CSSHEGEWISCH wrote: CPRail modeler wrote: Just a question,Does this acquisition mean CP gets all of DM&E? Just wondering...CP is seeking to acquire all of DM&E/IC&E.
Which means tracks, facilities and trains? Plus the other stuff I may have forgotten?
Well according to Mayo they believe that the increased traffic will create a hostile enviroment and will drive away their customers, and thus impact their bottom line. Thus they hardly have a reason to co-operate with the railroad.
They're also arguing that, based on current prices, the $2.5b loan cannot be repaid according to Bearingpoint, an accounting firm.
This is interesting. If this multibillion loan is a such good deal, then why isn't private money rushing forward to finance it?
Here's a link to their propaganda videos.
http://www.protectrochester.com/video.html
http://dmetraintruth.com/video/dme_sd3.html
http://dmetraintruth.com
protectrochester.com
Convicted One wrote:The railroad should perhaps have considered partnering with Mayo, to get that prohibition undone. Mayo might have proven to be a formidable ally.
The railroad should perhaps have considered partnering with Mayo, to get that prohibition undone. Mayo might have proven to be a formidable ally.
So basically CN is the largest producer of lutefisk in North America?
enr2099 wrote:CN???? SAFE???? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!! Oh...that's too funny. A railway that's having major derailments almost everyday, a railway that killed the entire fish population of the Cheakamus River, oh yeah that's a real safe company....
CN???? SAFE???? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!! Oh...that's too funny. A railway that's having major derailments almost everyday, a railway that killed the entire fish population of the Cheakamus River, oh yeah that's a real safe company....
Newyorkcentralfan wrote: This is interesting. If this multibillion loan is a such good deal, then why isn't private money rushing forward to finance it?
Probably for the same reason that private money doesn't rush forward to instantly finance big BN and UP projects, and why such projects tend to be funded internally.
Well, putting a hand out to the government and saying 'gimme $2.5 billion' is hardly funding it internally.
Not that think there's anything wrong with government loans to corporations; but not if we know beforehand that there's no way that it can be paid back. If it's going to end up being a grant they should be upfront about it and ask for a grant. That way we can decide wether to give it to them based on the merits.
MichaelSol wrote:Probably for the same reason that private money doesn't rush forward to instantly finance big BN and UP projects, and why such projects tend to be funded internally.
Hey, if they can kill you off before retirement they don't have to pay a pension and get nothing in return.
What Gustav Krupp said, still holds true.
"We want only loyal workers who are grateful from the bottom of their hearts for the bread which we let them earn."
enr2099 wrote:A multi-billion dollar railway and they're too cheap to make sure everyone has radios, to properly maintain locomotives and track and to provide employees with proper training. New employees with only 3 months training are being foreman/conductor qualified with absolutely no familiarzation or experience as a helper/brakeman.
Newyorkcentralfan wrote: Hey, if they can kill you off before retirement they don't have to pay a pension and get nothing in return. What Gustav Krupp said, still holds true."We want only loyal workers who are grateful from the bottom of their hearts for the bread which we let them earn." enr2099 wrote:A multi-billion dollar railway and they're too cheap to make sure everyone has radios, to properly maintain locomotives and track and to provide employees with proper training. New employees with only 3 months training are being foreman/conductor qualified with absolutely no familiarzation or experience as a helper/brakeman.
Every company should expect a level of loyalty from it's employees. After all, they are paying a salary, and giving benefits. But, the loyalty needs to cut both ways. Companies need to be responsive to those who give good service, and good job performance. In some places, this has been forgotten by both the employees, and the employer.
In Krupp's case, especially when Alfred Krupp, and then his son Fritz were in charge, the average Kruppianer could lay claim to a good wage, and benefits, as well as a pension plan, and some other benefits. White collar Kruppianer received even more. In return, however, Krupp demanded (and in many cases) received unwavering loyalty from his employees. They knew which side their bread was buttered on. When Krupp drew up the Generalregulativ of 1872, spelling out not only the benefits that he would offer his employees, but also their duties to die Firma. In 1872 this kind of action was unheard of. In many other industries in Europe, mulish workers toiled under suspicious managers. Krupp drew up this document to keep the Socialists at bay, as many other European industries were feeling the weight of communist, and socialist led workers strikes. And while many of his workers had Socialist leanings, they never struck, because Krupp dealt with strikers ruthlessly, and to strike was to be dismissed from Krupp, and that person would lose their pension, and health benefits. In short, Kruppianer had it good, and they knew it, and not many of them were willing to risk it.
The Krupp history is a fascinating one.
RRKen wrote:In all this, many here fail to see the major comments CP made in it's application to the STB for this transaction. Let me reprint it here for you. ".......DME still faces a number of significant hurdles before it can implement the PRB line project. DME has not completed the process of acquiring (thorugh purchase, easement, or condemnation proceedings) all of the right-of-way it needs to build the proposed PRB line. Nor has it executed agreements with PRB mines to connect with, and to operate over, their loading tracks and facilities. Most importantly, DME has not secured sufficient commitments from prospective coal shippers to route their traffic over the proposed PRB line to justify the very large investment required to build it. Finally, to date, DME has not been successful in arranging financing for the project.The proposed acquistion of DME by CPR would not, in and of itself, eliminate all of these obstacles. To be sure, as a Class 1 railroad, CPR possesses far greater financial capability than DME to undertake the PRB line project." "However, several significant milestones must be achieved before the project can be justified economically." "Moreover, the regulatory climate must remain conducive to substantial new investment in rail infrastructure. If the proposed transaction is approved, CPR will work diligently with DME to satisfy these preconditions to construction of the proposed PRB line.""Regardless of whether the PRB line is ultimately built, I firmley believe that CPR's acquisition of DME will be beneficial for CPR, DME, and their respective customers and the communities that they serve. It is on that basis - and not on the basis of speculation regarding the future of the PRB line project - that CPR made its decision to acquire DME. This reality is deomonstrated by the consideration that CPR agreed to pay under its acquistion agreement with DME, which is structured to reflect the separate nature of the decision whether to proceed with the PRB line project."So you see, there is no absolute in this case regarding the PRB line project. If you still believe there is, contact your fairy godmother for guidence.
In all this, many here fail to see the major comments CP made in it's application to the STB for this transaction. Let me reprint it here for you.
".......DME still faces a number of significant hurdles before it can implement the PRB line project. DME has not completed the process of acquiring (thorugh purchase, easement, or condemnation proceedings) all of the right-of-way it needs to build the proposed PRB line. Nor has it executed agreements with PRB mines to connect with, and to operate over, their loading tracks and facilities. Most importantly, DME has not secured sufficient commitments from prospective coal shippers to route their traffic over the proposed PRB line to justify the very large investment required to build it. Finally, to date, DME has not been successful in arranging financing for the project.
The proposed acquistion of DME by CPR would not, in and of itself, eliminate all of these obstacles. To be sure, as a Class 1 railroad, CPR possesses far greater financial capability than DME to undertake the PRB line project." "However, several significant milestones must be achieved before the project can be justified economically." "Moreover, the regulatory climate must remain conducive to substantial new investment in rail infrastructure. If the proposed transaction is approved, CPR will work diligently with DME to satisfy these preconditions to construction of the proposed PRB line."
"Regardless of whether the PRB line is ultimately built, I firmley believe that CPR's acquisition of DME will be beneficial for CPR, DME, and their respective customers and the communities that they serve. It is on that basis - and not on the basis of speculation regarding the future of the PRB line project - that CPR made its decision to acquire DME. This reality is deomonstrated by the consideration that CPR agreed to pay under its acquistion agreement with DME, which is structured to reflect the separate nature of the decision whether to proceed with the PRB line project."
So you see, there is no absolute in this case regarding the PRB line project. If you still believe there is, contact your fairy godmother for guidence.
My fairy godmother tells me the double track is going back in from Minnesota City to Pewaukee.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.