henry6 There would have to be groups of centralized crew lists. Not all crews would be qualified on all railroads everywhere just those withing a reasonalbe commuting distance, say one or two hours, in any given direction. This is all just thinking outloud on the keyboard...there's lots to think about and work out. But nobody else anywhere else that I know of has come up with anything except inside the box employee/employer scenerio.
There would have to be groups of centralized crew lists. Not all crews would be qualified on all railroads everywhere just those withing a reasonalbe commuting distance, say one or two hours, in any given direction. This is all just thinking outloud on the keyboard...there's lots to think about and work out. But nobody else anywhere else that I know of has come up with anything except inside the box employee/employer scenerio.
The box is 12 Hours of Service vs 24 hour/365 day irregular demand. Getting out of that box demands suspending reality. Last I looked - reality was not suspendable.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Truly, the 24 hour/ 365 demand is irregular. But there are still reality-based upper limits on how many trains can be pushed over a particular route/ line of road in each direction every 8 or 24 hrs., depending on its configuration and opposing traffic, etc. More than that, and some trains start getting stashed away in sidings.
Once that's happened and those trains are there, they then don't need crews to sit on them and wait for hours on end until they "die on the law" for a slot to open up, meanwhile accomplishing nothing productive. Better to redeploy those crews out on the moving trains instead.
Thus, an upper limit on the number of crews needed in each pool or on each board could be estimated and provided, to keep things fluid and the start times more predictable within a certain range. Of course, when traffic eases up, some will be without work, depending on how that 'pain' is then shared or spread out among them (by seniority or pro-rata, etc.).
Which is one reason why the current system results in a comparatively high rate of pay, sometimes known as "misery pay" (like "combat pay").
- Paul North.
henry6 Georgia Railroader: henry6: This seems like as good a thread as any to throw this out to. Some entrpenureal genius I hope will take this idea up and study it to see where it might lead. Instead of the railroads maintiaing rosters, employing crews, there be labor pool company instead. This company would employ engineers and conductors and then contract with the railroads to provice their services. This company would not be tied to just one railroad but to many or all. They would provide properly rested and qualified engineers and conductors (airline pilots, plumbers, truck drivers, what have you) to the proper place at the proper time. This company would be the employer of the job catagory(ies) and pay and benefit them; the company would be paid by the railroads (airlines, pipelines, plumbers, trucking, bus companies). The hours of service, proper rest, drug testing, everything, would rest on the shoulders of this new company. In theory they would compensate the employees in a manner so that there would be on problems missing a day or call and would be able to provide the proper employee at the proper place at the proper time....it may mean employees would be slaried, the union would probably approve, Labor Department would have to agree (why not?). If the company would have large enough crew bases in major areas with the idea of servicing more than one railroad...thus a crew could be out on ARR one day, BRR the next, all assignement could be covered on all railroads with enough crews so that fatigue, sleep, away from home time, etc, would not be the major problem that it is today. AIrlines and their pilots could gain some of the same benefits with a similar service. Railroads, airlines, etc. could still employ people for set job assignements and use the Pool Company for fill in or rely totally on the Pool Company. There is a lot of things to think about, iron out, work out. It is not a simple "no" because anythng is possible when it is needed. A simple "yes" because there are complications and contradictions, and cross purposes, etc. to be dealt with. But I bet it could be done for the success and benefit of fatigue plagued insdustries.and services. Doesn't sound like it would solve anything to begin with. Second, where does the labor come from? Does this 3rd party company have it's own people? If so, that wouldn't go over well with those of us who have established our seniority. Sounds like an extraboard to me. Georgia Railroader: henry6: This seems like as good a thread as any to throw this out to. Some entrpenureal genius I hope will take this idea up and study it to see where it might lead. Instead of the railroads maintiaing rosters, employing crews, there be labor pool company instead. This company would employ engineers and conductors and then contract with the railroads to provice their services. This company would not be tied to just one railroad but to many or all. They would provide properly rested and qualified engineers and conductors (airline pilots, plumbers, truck drivers, what have you) to the proper place at the proper time. This company would be the employer of the job catagory(ies) and pay and benefit them; the company would be paid by the railroads (airlines, pipelines, plumbers, trucking, bus companies). The hours of service, proper rest, drug testing, everything, would rest on the shoulders of this new company. In theory they would compensate the employees in a manner so that there would be on problems missing a day or call and would be able to provide the proper employee at the proper place at the proper time....it may mean employees would be slaried, the union would probably approve, Labor Department would have to agree (why not?). If the company would have large enough crew bases in major areas with the idea of servicing more than one railroad...thus a crew could be out on ARR one day, BRR the next, all assignement could be covered on all railroads with enough crews so that fatigue, sleep, away from home time, etc, would not be the major problem that it is today. AIrlines and their pilots could gain some of the same benefits with a similar service. Railroads, airlines, etc. could still employ people for set job assignements and use the Pool Company for fill in or rely totally on the Pool Company. There is a lot of things to think about, iron out, work out. It is not a simple "no" because anythng is possible when it is needed. A simple "yes" because there are complications and contradictions, and cross purposes, etc. to be dealt with. But I bet it could be done for the success and benefit of fatigue plagued insdustries.and services. Doesn't sound like it would solve anything to begin with. Second, where does the labor come from? Does this 3rd party company have it's own people? If so, that wouldn't go over well with those of us who have established our seniority. Sounds like an extraboard to me. Why did I know there would be no postive feedback on this. All who have repsonded have done so in the negative! Not surprised. It is outside the box of employer-employee. So lets look at it this way. A RR has 600 engineers on its payroll, B RR has maybe 200, C RR perhaps 20 or less. None of the railroads need all their engineers all the time....indeterminate traffic schedules, work rules rest and away from home layovers; there are all kinds of problems. So out of the 820 we have counted maybe only 400 are on the road at any one time. What if the PoolCRew Company had as few as 700 engineers, licensed and qualified. With proper coordination and planning the Company could provide fully and properly rested crews at any starting terminal at any time of the day or night, seven days a week. The Pool company is the caller for each client railroad, manages the rest and work periods, qualifying, insurances, and pays the crews. Union rules, wages, operating rules, qualifying, etc. are minor points that can be worked out so that this can be viable. I am simplistic here, but if it is really viable all problems can be addressed and the concept made workable.
Georgia Railroader: henry6: This seems like as good a thread as any to throw this out to. Some entrpenureal genius I hope will take this idea up and study it to see where it might lead. Instead of the railroads maintiaing rosters, employing crews, there be labor pool company instead. This company would employ engineers and conductors and then contract with the railroads to provice their services. This company would not be tied to just one railroad but to many or all. They would provide properly rested and qualified engineers and conductors (airline pilots, plumbers, truck drivers, what have you) to the proper place at the proper time. This company would be the employer of the job catagory(ies) and pay and benefit them; the company would be paid by the railroads (airlines, pipelines, plumbers, trucking, bus companies). The hours of service, proper rest, drug testing, everything, would rest on the shoulders of this new company. In theory they would compensate the employees in a manner so that there would be on problems missing a day or call and would be able to provide the proper employee at the proper place at the proper time....it may mean employees would be slaried, the union would probably approve, Labor Department would have to agree (why not?). If the company would have large enough crew bases in major areas with the idea of servicing more than one railroad...thus a crew could be out on ARR one day, BRR the next, all assignement could be covered on all railroads with enough crews so that fatigue, sleep, away from home time, etc, would not be the major problem that it is today. AIrlines and their pilots could gain some of the same benefits with a similar service. Railroads, airlines, etc. could still employ people for set job assignements and use the Pool Company for fill in or rely totally on the Pool Company. There is a lot of things to think about, iron out, work out. It is not a simple "no" because anythng is possible when it is needed. A simple "yes" because there are complications and contradictions, and cross purposes, etc. to be dealt with. But I bet it could be done for the success and benefit of fatigue plagued insdustries.and services. Doesn't sound like it would solve anything to begin with. Second, where does the labor come from? Does this 3rd party company have it's own people? If so, that wouldn't go over well with those of us who have established our seniority. Sounds like an extraboard to me.
henry6: This seems like as good a thread as any to throw this out to. Some entrpenureal genius I hope will take this idea up and study it to see where it might lead. Instead of the railroads maintiaing rosters, employing crews, there be labor pool company instead. This company would employ engineers and conductors and then contract with the railroads to provice their services. This company would not be tied to just one railroad but to many or all. They would provide properly rested and qualified engineers and conductors (airline pilots, plumbers, truck drivers, what have you) to the proper place at the proper time. This company would be the employer of the job catagory(ies) and pay and benefit them; the company would be paid by the railroads (airlines, pipelines, plumbers, trucking, bus companies). The hours of service, proper rest, drug testing, everything, would rest on the shoulders of this new company. In theory they would compensate the employees in a manner so that there would be on problems missing a day or call and would be able to provide the proper employee at the proper place at the proper time....it may mean employees would be slaried, the union would probably approve, Labor Department would have to agree (why not?). If the company would have large enough crew bases in major areas with the idea of servicing more than one railroad...thus a crew could be out on ARR one day, BRR the next, all assignement could be covered on all railroads with enough crews so that fatigue, sleep, away from home time, etc, would not be the major problem that it is today. AIrlines and their pilots could gain some of the same benefits with a similar service. Railroads, airlines, etc. could still employ people for set job assignements and use the Pool Company for fill in or rely totally on the Pool Company. There is a lot of things to think about, iron out, work out. It is not a simple "no" because anythng is possible when it is needed. A simple "yes" because there are complications and contradictions, and cross purposes, etc. to be dealt with. But I bet it could be done for the success and benefit of fatigue plagued insdustries.and services.
This seems like as good a thread as any to throw this out to. Some entrpenureal genius I hope will take this idea up and study it to see where it might lead. Instead of the railroads maintiaing rosters, employing crews, there be labor pool company instead. This company would employ engineers and conductors and then contract with the railroads to provice their services. This company would not be tied to just one railroad but to many or all. They would provide properly rested and qualified engineers and conductors (airline pilots, plumbers, truck drivers, what have you) to the proper place at the proper time. This company would be the employer of the job catagory(ies) and pay and benefit them; the company would be paid by the railroads (airlines, pipelines, plumbers, trucking, bus companies). The hours of service, proper rest, drug testing, everything, would rest on the shoulders of this new company. In theory they would compensate the employees in a manner so that there would be on problems missing a day or call and would be able to provide the proper employee at the proper place at the proper time....it may mean employees would be slaried, the union would probably approve, Labor Department would have to agree (why not?). If the company would have large enough crew bases in major areas with the idea of servicing more than one railroad...thus a crew could be out on ARR one day, BRR the next, all assignement could be covered on all railroads with enough crews so that fatigue, sleep, away from home time, etc, would not be the major problem that it is today. AIrlines and their pilots could gain some of the same benefits with a similar service. Railroads, airlines, etc. could still employ people for set job assignements and use the Pool Company for fill in or rely totally on the Pool Company. There is a lot of things to think about, iron out, work out. It is not a simple "no" because anythng is possible when it is needed. A simple "yes" because there are complications and contradictions, and cross purposes, etc. to be dealt with. But I bet it could be done for the success and benefit of fatigue plagued insdustries.and services.
Doesn't sound like it would solve anything to begin with. Second, where does the labor come from? Does this 3rd party company have it's own people? If so, that wouldn't go over well with those of us who have established our seniority. Sounds like an extraboard to me.
Why did I know there would be no postive feedback on this. All who have repsonded have done so in the negative! Not surprised. It is outside the box of employer-employee.
So lets look at it this way. A RR has 600 engineers on its payroll, B RR has maybe 200, C RR perhaps 20 or less. None of the railroads need all their engineers all the time....indeterminate traffic schedules, work rules rest and away from home layovers; there are all kinds of problems. So out of the 820 we have counted maybe only 400 are on the road at any one time. What if the PoolCRew Company had as few as 700 engineers, licensed and qualified. With proper coordination and planning the Company could provide fully and properly rested crews at any starting terminal at any time of the day or night, seven days a week. The Pool company is the caller for each client railroad, manages the rest and work periods, qualifying, insurances, and pays the crews. Union rules, wages, operating rules, qualifying, etc. are minor points that can be worked out so that this can be viable. I am simplistic here, but if it is really viable all problems can be addressed and the concept made workable.
I'm just expressing my opinion on something I deal with everyday. How often do you deal with it? You work for the RR long, at all? Dont get bent out of shape because guys that have done this a long time find holes in this idea. All I wanted to know is where do you supply all these crews from, some third party? If so then nobody will be for having someone who has no seniority coming on their district and taking their work. Make sense?
Union wages, rules, ect are minor points? Not really.
Sounds like a good idea...
But like the Space Shuttle, which seemed like a good idea from a expense stand point, after all, a re-usable space craft as opposed to one that has to be built from scratch every times makes more sense, right?
But it turned out the cost of turning the shuttle, and doing all the tear down and maintenance required was three times the cost of NASA staying with the Saturn 5 lift vehicle and a one time around maybe twice re-usable capsule/cargo vehicle.
You don't take into account the fact that to be profitable, the Pool company would not be able to pay their crews anywhere near what railroads pay us, if they did pay them the same, the cost to the railroad would increase.
An example, say we are paid $30.00 hourly...say 50 crews a day at 8 hours per crew.
400 hours at 30 per hours is $12000.00. per 24 hour day.
Now say the Pool Crew company has a staff payroll and operating expense of 10%, or $1200.00 per day.
$12000.00-$1200.00 leaves $10800. 00 to divide between your crews,
$10800.00 divided by 400 hours equals $27.00 and hour.
So you pay them only $27.00 per hour.
Why would they work for a Pool Crew company at $27.00 an hour when they can earn $30.00 an hour?
In order for your pool crew company to make money, you would have charge the railroad the $30.00 an hour, plus enough to run your company, in essence pass your operating cost, your salary, your staff salary, insurance and whatever profit margin you work at on to the railroad, which will always make what the railroad pays your pool crew company more expensive than if the railroad simply hired and paid them itself.
In essence, you're talking about a temp agency for railroad crews, and I know of no temp agency that pays anywhere near the going salary for any job.
Add in your cost or part of the employee insurance your company pays not only for the crews but your staff, and the difference becomes even greater.
And, as Zug pointed out, you would still be faced with the same fatigue issues the railroads face now, and in order to overcome that issue, you would have to hire at least 10% to 20% more crews than the railroad hires itself, which would further increase the cost you pass on...
I applaud you for thinking beyond the normal concept of railroad employment, but in reality, railroads have faced the issue of more work than available crews for over a century, and statistically speaking, riding a train is still the safest mode of transportation per million miles traveled than any other...
There is a term in the industry, crew start cost, which on most Class 1 roads is about $1500.00 per 3 man crew, this is what ti cost to put a 3 man crew on a locomotive(s) and be ready to perform service.
It includes cost or rent of the locomotive(s), cost %of the track including maintenance, fuel, insurance, dispatching, support staff, (TM salaries, management cost, crew salaries, insurance and arbitraries, railroad supplied safety devices, gloves, lanterns and batteries, just about all the things you could imagine)...and I doubt a private firm could match that for a 3 man trained crew.
Not being negative for the sake of it, but simply pointing out the down side that may not have been considered, and besides, this idea of something like a crew for hire or a temp agency has been approached before, and it faced the same basic obstacle, that being that railroads can hire, train and pay crews better than an outside source simply because they can make the economies of scale work in their behalf, where a private company has nowhere to spread the cost to, except to pass it on to their customer, the railroad.
23 17 46 11
What Ed said.
No I don't work for a railroad, airline, trucking company, etc. But so what.
As the PoolCrew COmpany I hire you to be an engineer and guarentee you a five day, 40 hour work week, with full benefits. To the railroad companies I guarentee a reste and non fatigued, qualified, train crew for every job they have. The employee will never miss a turn or be holed up for days waiting to be called. The railroads never have to hold trains or cars until a rested crew is available. Safety is increased because fatigue is eliminated. Stress is reduced because employee is working on regular basis, pay is uniform each week, probably home each night. So what if he works two days on railroad A, two on C, and one on B or whatever combination. Work rules, pay, union, railroads, employees all agree to whatever has to be agreed to to make it happen...they are man made rules and regulations and not mountains of kryptonite! Who says at this point that scheduled trains like passenger and commuter runs won't be run differently than right now with "owned" bid jobs? Seniority might be within the PoolCrew Company but probably not af first. Maybe A crews have to be assigned A jobs only, etc. until death or dismissal. There are so many things to be thought through and worked out .I think it all could be arrainged for the benefit of the railroads (airlines, trucking companies, etc) the employees, the unions (guaranteed work for members), railroad customers, and safety experts. Yes it is outside the employee-employer box. Yes it is not one employer railroad. No, I don't think it should be dismissed out of hand because it has never been done. Running trains from A to Z was never done before 1830.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
I would not dismiss your pool idea out of hand, especially on the basis of any cost issue. The whole premise of this outside-the-box pool company is to deal with the extra cost imposed by sleep disorders. So the cost has to rise. The only question is whether it is cheaper for the railroad to manage the sleep disorder issue themselves or to farm it out to a specialized company. There are many cases where businesses find it cheaper to get their labor from an independent contractor.
It may very well be the case that this sleep/rest issue is so complex and challenging that it will be more cost effective to let an independent contractor do it. And if that is what they decide to do, the pay will be whatever it will be. Since this whole problem amounts to a new added cost, the money has to come out of somebody’s pocket. But there will be no comparison between the direct railroad pay and pay through a third party agency because working direct won’t be an option.
I suspect the sleep disorder issue will be accompanied by massive new federal regulations about how to deal with it. I think that is what the NTSB activism in their Iowa crash report is all about. So when the dust settles on sleep disorders and its relationship with national healthcare, it may indeed be the straw that breaks the camel’s back and changes the labor force from direct hire to a specialized, medically supervised pool. If they can impose PTC on the industry, just think what they can do with fatigue management.
An issue with the pool crew company proposal that has not been addressed is that it, not unreasonably, will be perceived as a union-busting tactic. The labor issues involved, such as merging seniority rosters, qualification on multiple routes, etc. will have to be addressed.
CSSHEGEWISCH An issue with the pool crew company proposal that has not been addressed is that it, not unreasonably, will be perceived as a union-busting tactic. The labor issues involved, such as merging seniority rosters, qualification on multiple routes, etc. will have to be addressed.
Agreed, Paul...and I have addressed that several times so far...The PoolCrew Company could be a union shop....existing railroad union contracts, rules, etc., would have to be adhered to or otherwise addressed. But as Bucyrus points out, if it is a cure for fatigue, the cost is the cost. Besides, if it is a cure for fatigue, steady paycheck, standard work week, not having to keep more on the payroll than needed (crews laying over without working, extra boards, furloughed on tap to return, etc.), safer operations and crew safety. A machine that is in working order makes money...if it is broken or out of service, it is a liablity in some way or another. The idea, too, here is the The PoolCrew Company would be an agreement amongst all parties...could even be owned by more than one railroad or completely removed from any railroad...but it would have the blessing of railroad companies, unions, employees, and government safety experts. Aside from paying 700 engineers $1600 a week whether the work or not to assure rest periods, guarenteed income, reliefe of stress and abating fatigue, who has another idea?
henry6 Aside from paying 700 engineers $1600 a week whether the work or not to assure rest periods, guarenteed income, reliefe of stress and abating fatigue, who has another idea?
Aside from paying 700 engineers $1600 a week whether the work or not to assure rest periods, guarenteed income, reliefe of stress and abating fatigue, who has another idea?
If you find a solution that works for one, it will not work for others.
Perhaps a tiered system, where the workaholics can work as often as possible (since they will have no home life, they should have no problem staying rested, as they will likely get out on their rest every trip). Then there can be a second tier, that is guaranteed "X" number of hours off between trips--they can fill the crews that the hog pool cannot. Then there could be a third pool, like a guaranteed extra board; the few that would be needed here could have a set period (like shifts--0800 to 1600, 1600-0000, 0000-0800) in which they can be called (and would be expected to be rested both technically and realistically); if they do not get called, then they would collect their "guarantee" for that day.
How to choose who would work which board would likely have to be determined locally.
henry6 No I don't work for a railroad, airline, trucking company, etc. But so what. Kinda figured. As the PoolCrew COmpany I hire you to be an engineer and guarentee you a five day, 40 hour work week, with full benefits. To the railroad companies I guarentee a reste and non fatigued, qualified, train crew for every job they have. The employee will never miss a turn or be holed up for days waiting to be called. The railroads never have to hold trains or cars until a rested crew is available. Safety is increased because fatigue is eliminated. Stress is reduced because employee is working on regular basis, pay is uniform each week, probably home each night. So what if he works two days on railroad A, two on C, and one on B or whatever combination. Work rules, pay, union, railroads, employees all agree to whatever has to be agreed to to make it happen...they are man made rules and regulations and not mountains of kryptonite! It's nothing I would agree to, why would I want to make less money? This pool thing gonna pay guys 100k a year like some are used to making? You think we are just going let some outsiders come in and change our union contracts and agreements just like that? I think not. We will fight tooth and nail to hang on to what our brothers before us fought so hard for. Unless you can say you have walked in our shoes how can you say what's best for us? Who says at this point that scheduled trains like passenger and commuter runs won't be run differently than right now with "owned" bid jobs? Seniority might be within the PoolCrew Company but probably not af first. Maybe A crews have to be assigned A jobs only, etc. until death or dismissal. There are so many things to be thought through and worked out .I think it all could be arrainged for the benefit of the railroads (airlines, trucking companies, etc) the employees, the unions (guaranteed work for members), railroad customers, and safety experts. Yes it is outside the employee-employer box. Yes it is not one employer railroad. No, I don't think it should be dismissed out of hand because it has never been done. Running trains from A to Z was never done before 1830.
Kinda figured.
As the PoolCrew COmpany I hire you to be an engineer and guarentee you a five day, 40 hour work week, with full benefits. To the railroad companies I guarentee a reste and non fatigued, qualified, train crew for every job they have. The employee will never miss a turn or be holed up for days waiting to be called. The railroads never have to hold trains or cars until a rested crew is available. Safety is increased because fatigue is eliminated. Stress is reduced because employee is working on regular basis, pay is uniform each week, probably home each night. So what if he works two days on railroad A, two on C, and one on B or whatever combination. Work rules, pay, union, railroads, employees all agree to whatever has to be agreed to to make it happen...they are man made rules and regulations and not mountains of kryptonite!
It's nothing I would agree to, why would I want to make less money? This pool thing gonna pay guys 100k a year like some are used to making? You think we are just going let some outsiders come in and change our union contracts and agreements just like that? I think not. We will fight tooth and nail to hang on to what our brothers before us fought so hard for. Unless you can say you have walked in our shoes how can you say what's best for us?
Who says at this point that scheduled trains like passenger and commuter runs won't be run differently than right now with "owned" bid jobs? Seniority might be within the PoolCrew Company but probably not af first. Maybe A crews have to be assigned A jobs only, etc. until death or dismissal. There are so many things to be thought through and worked out .I think it all could be arrainged for the benefit of the railroads (airlines, trucking companies, etc) the employees, the unions (guaranteed work for members), railroad customers, and safety experts. Yes it is outside the employee-employer box. Yes it is not one employer railroad. No, I don't think it should be dismissed out of hand because it has never been done. Running trains from A to Z was never done before 1830.
Georgia Railroader henry6: No I don't work for a railroad, airline, trucking company, etc. But so what. Kinda figured.
henry6: No I don't work for a railroad, airline, trucking company, etc. But so what. Kinda figured.
What does it matter if I work for a railroad or a plumbing company or am an interior decorator? I
zardoz henry6: Aside from paying 700 engineers $1600 a week whether the work or not to assure rest periods, guarenteed income, reliefe of stress and abating fatigue, who has another idea? The problem might lie with the fact that some of those 700 will want to work more often (and make more money), while others will be content to work less often in order to have a higher quality of home life, and yet some others have no home life so they don't care, while others want a balance, etc, etc, etc. If you find a solution that works for one, it will not work for others. Perhaps a tiered system, where the workaholics can work as often as possible (since they will have no home life, they should have no problem staying rested, as they will likely get out on their rest every trip). Then there can be a second tier, that is guaranteed "X" number of hours off between trips--they can fill the crews that the hog pool cannot. Then there could be a third pool, like a guaranteed extra board; the few that would be needed here could have a set period (like shifts--0800 to 1600, 1600-0000, 0000-0800) in which they can be called (and would be expected to be rested both technically and realistically); if they do not get called, then they would collect their "guarantee" for that day. How to choose who would work which board would likely have to be determined locally.
henry6: Aside from paying 700 engineers $1600 a week whether the work or not to assure rest periods, guarenteed income, reliefe of stress and abating fatigue, who has another idea?
Yes, an employee can maybe dictate his desire: home everynight or not, no or all daytime shifts, no ir only weekend shift. This could be a supplimental, sorta but not like, an employment agency or secretarial pool. What I hear from crews is that they want to be guaranteed work and thus a salary. What the railroad wants is a rested and qualified crew when and where they need it. What the transportation safety people are looking for is a safe operation and the elimination of or workable way of dealing with fatigue. If one, two, three, no matter how many, railroads can rely on one source to take care of their needs, an engineer or pilot or truck driver is guaranteed a minimum livabale weekly paycheck, and there are no accidents (damage, death, maim, loss of time, stopping operations) then everybody wins. Maybe there has to be an adjustment in how the work is done, divided, assigned, and payed for. So be it. Things have changed before. Things will change again.
As someone familiar with both driver leasing and driver temp agencies in the trucking industry I must agree with Georgia Railroader, the idea won't work for railroads. I worked for two driver temp agencies GPC Driving (part of the General Personnel Services temp agency) and another called Best Driver. The reason I was with them was that I was a college professor who didn't teach over the summer and wanted to work a bit here and there, and with a temp agency I could refuse work not to my liking and would still be called for other jobs (which I could also refuse). Now, one of the places they sent me to was CVS Pharmacy, which, when they bought Eckert Pharmacy, replaced their own (union) company drivers with a driver service (either Penske or Ryder, I can't remember) which paid less, had lower benefits, and ridiculous labor accounting that truck drivers found oppressive (the trucks had computers on the dashboard, that every store they stopped at, they had to enter the mileage, the time they arrived, the time they departed, etc). This is a hard job, unloading an entire truck by hand down rollers, including hurricane water, six bottles of gallon-each water on a tray like a case of pop comes on, at around seven stores up to 200 miles away from the terminal. And they couldn't keep drivers, they had such a huge turnover that my temp agency asked me and several others to give it a try, which I did for a few weeks, and then refused to go there again. All of the other drivers I met who worked in the temp agency had mortgages and kids etc. and were looking for a job with a guaranteed paycheck, and would leave as soon as they could. I just don't see anyone agreeing to the sort of lifestyle required of railroaders (especially the 24-hour on call bit, working on Christmas, etc) without the guaranteed high salary, union work rules etc that the job has now. That is to say, if the railroad doesn't want to give me any loyalty, any security, I won't give them any either. In my opinion the cure for the sleep problem is something like calling windows plus higher pay to make up for the fact that those with seniority won't necesarily get a hot shot if it isn't in their calling window.
henry6 Georgia Railroader: henry6: No I don't work for a railroad, airline, trucking company, etc. But so what. Kinda figured. What does it matter if I work for a railroad or a plumbing company or am an interior decorator? I
Georgia Railroader: henry6: No I don't work for a railroad, airline, trucking company, etc. But so what. Kinda figured.
BECAUSE YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND OUR DAY TO DAY LIVES UNLESS YOU HAVE LIVED IT. Dont pretend to know what someone goes through unless you too have been in their shoes. I dont chime in on OTR trucking talk because it's something I know nothing about, nor will I pretend to by trying to reinvent some wheel that belongs in their world. I'm getting a migraine.
zugmann Bucyrus: According to the NTSB report, working irregular schedules causes sleep disorders including the inability to stay awake at times. It this settled science? Or is it agenda-driven junk science? If it is settled science, it poses a very large problem for the railroad industry. Many railroaders work irregular schedules. How can it be acceptable that they are working at tasks where a loss of attention can prove fatal, and yet, they are subject to involuntarily falling asleep at any time? If what the NTSB says about irregular schedules causing sleep disorders is true, then one of two things must be done: 1) Eliminate irregular work schedules. 2) Test all employees working irregular schedules for sleep disorders, and remove from service any employees found to be afflicted. Anyone that works an irregular schedule can attest that it is not "junk science". Just curious if you ever had the pleasure, Bucyrus? With the railroads you get the double-whammy. You get irregular schedules, and UNPREDICTABLE schedules if you are a flea on the extra list. So you don't know whether you are going to go to work in 10 hours or 30. Try getting proper rest under those circumstances. As for your suggestions: (1.) will probably never be 100% achievable due to the nature of the beast. There are ways to make the job more scheduled, but it would probably require new contract rules regarding territory covered and whatnot. And (2.): I know if my railroad suspects someone has a medical sleep issue, they are pulled out of service immediately and won't be allowed to re-enter service without their doctor's and the company medical dep't's permission.
Bucyrus: According to the NTSB report, working irregular schedules causes sleep disorders including the inability to stay awake at times. It this settled science? Or is it agenda-driven junk science? If it is settled science, it poses a very large problem for the railroad industry. Many railroaders work irregular schedules. How can it be acceptable that they are working at tasks where a loss of attention can prove fatal, and yet, they are subject to involuntarily falling asleep at any time? If what the NTSB says about irregular schedules causing sleep disorders is true, then one of two things must be done: 1) Eliminate irregular work schedules. 2) Test all employees working irregular schedules for sleep disorders, and remove from service any employees found to be afflicted.
Anyone that works an irregular schedule can attest that it is not "junk science". Just curious if you ever had the pleasure, Bucyrus? With the railroads you get the double-whammy. You get irregular schedules, and UNPREDICTABLE schedules if you are a flea on the extra list. So you don't know whether you are going to go to work in 10 hours or 30. Try getting proper rest under those circumstances.
As for your suggestions: (1.) will probably never be 100% achievable due to the nature of the beast. There are ways to make the job more scheduled, but it would probably require new contract rules regarding territory covered and whatnot.
And (2.): I know if my railroad suspects someone has a medical sleep issue, they are pulled out of service immediately and won't be allowed to re-enter service without their doctor's and the company medical dep't's permission.
Yes, I have had the pleasure of fighting that battle many moons ago. I know first hand that nighttime railroading is incredibly sleep inducing.
I am not saying it is junk science or settled science, but if it is anywhere in between, it should be full red alert to deal with it. And yet, I don’t sense that it is taken that seriously. So, I am wondering, why is there a disconnect between a newly discovered medical condition that can suddenly render a victim unconscious without warning, and the lackadaisical response to it? Granted, it may not afflict everyone who works irregular schedules, but you don’t run trains until you know who is at risk and who is not. So merely taking action against an employee suspected of having a sleep disorder is not enough.
There has to be testing just like drug testing. How else can you deal with this kind of threat? You don’t discover a medical condition that is likely to affect many of your employees without checking to see which ones are affected, and which are not. If it is a diagnosable condition, then every employee needs to be checked out to guarantee that they don't have it.
Georgia Railroader BECAUSE YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND OUR DAY TO DAY LIVES UNLESS YOU HAVE LIVED IT. Dont pretend to know what someone goes through unless you too have been in their shoes. I dont chime in on OTR trucking talk because it's something I know nothing about, nor will I pretend to by trying to reinvent some wheel that belongs in their world. I'm getting a migraine.
You don't have to walk in everybody's moccasins to see where the problems lie, what solutions have not bee explored, and that those inside the box fighting to get out can't get out. I have friends in the trucking industry, in airline industry, bus drivers, and railroading....labor and management. And what I have proposed is based on what I've obeserved, heard, and learned from all of them. Everybody is looking at what is to fix the problem and no one is looking at what is not. Maybe for the sake and future of all concerned, a different way of applying manpower has to be discussed. It is an idea that no one else has proposed, that those inside the box dismiss because they can't think of anything other than the way things are, the schedules, the rules, the pay scale as it is, etc. And you, Georgia, may be right. (And by the way this is not necessarily a temp agency, this is a full time company with full time employees with full time jobs. It is an answer not heard of or investigated yet as far as I know. It is something, as I said, that railorad companies, unions, employees, and whatever government agency or commission thinks it has a stake. But all parties have to agree about how it will be operated, etc. If you don't like it, you don't have to work it as an employee or participate as a railroad. Go to a railroad not involved or go make pizzas. I am not saying this is the answer but just an answer that hasn't been explored. I have heard a few here who understand what I am saying and proposing and many who are dismissing it out of hand because they either don't uderstand the concept or can't because of their work or other circumstances...I understand. I also have not heard any other answers.
If there's one thing I've learned in my time out here it's that you will never and I mean never get all the men to agree to one thing. You can never get everyone on board as everyone has their own idea,agendas, plans, whatever. The RR will go for whatever benefits them the most which is something that usually ends up screwing us in the long run. This is why most of us are really hesitant about any kind of change because it's almost always never in our favor.
I'm not trying to start a war with you about this. You post this up on a message board, and unless you live in a fantasy world you have to expect some people to disagree with you. That's all I'm doing, hell I have a right to do so. I give you credit for trying, but I honestly believe business will go on as usual until the feds get even more involved with our business and force the RR's to do something differently.
For now the best way to not be dead tired at work is to make the most of your off time, which can be impossible because of family,chores, errands ect.ect.ect.ect.ect. It's a viscous never ending cycle. It's railroading....
Once inside the box, evidently, always inside the box. Well, I see I am not going to win anybody over here. And it is just an idea I thought I'd throw out. Evidently I should go find my own box and stay there. I'm just not going to bang my head against the sides....
Here we have a great example of what happens when you have two people who know nothing about the problem, either from direct experience with the rails in one case or a willingness to accept the opinion of medical science. Why the insistence in throwing around the term "junk science" just because one doesn't like its implications? I'm sure both Henry and Bucyrus mean well, but neither have the experience or knowledge to propose the temp service or to challenge the validity and dangers of sleep disorders.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
[quote user="Bucyrus"]
zugmann: Bucyrus: According to the NTSB report, working irregular schedules causes sleep disorders including the inability to stay awake at times. It this settled science? Or is it agenda-driven junk science? If it is settled science, it poses a very large problem for the railroad industry. Many railroaders work irregular schedules. How can it be acceptable that they are working at tasks where a loss of attention can prove fatal, and yet, they are subject to involuntarily falling asleep at any time? If what the NTSB says about irregular schedules causing sleep disorders is true, then one of two things must be done: 1) Eliminate irregular work schedules. 2) Test all employees working irregular schedules for sleep disorders, and remove from service any employees found to be afflicted. Anyone that works an irregular schedule can attest that it is not "junk science". Just curious if you ever had the pleasure, Bucyrus? With the railroads you get the double-whammy. You get irregular schedules, and UNPREDICTABLE schedules if you are a flea on the extra list. So you don't know whether you are going to go to work in 10 hours or 30. Try getting proper rest under those circumstances. As for your suggestions: (1.) will probably never be 100% achievable due to the nature of the beast. There are ways to make the job more scheduled, but it would probably require new contract rules regarding territory covered and whatnot. And (2.): I know if my railroad suspects someone has a medical sleep issue, they are pulled out of service immediately and won't be allowed to re-enter service without their doctor's and the company medical dep't's permission.
According to the NTSB report, working irregular schedules causes sleep disorders including the inability to stay awake at times. It this settled science? Or is it agenda-driven junk science?
If it is settled science, it poses a very large problem for the railroad industry. Many railroaders work irregular schedules. How can it be acceptable that they are working at tasks where a loss of attention can prove fatal, and yet, they are subject to involuntarily falling asleep at any time?
If what the NTSB says about irregular schedules causing sleep disorders is true, then one of two things must be done:
1) Eliminate irregular work schedules.
2) Test all employees working irregular schedules for sleep disorders, and remove from service any employees found to be afflicted.
[/quote]
For now the best way to not be dead tired at work is to make the most of your off time, which can be impossible because of family,chores, errands ect.ect.ect.ect.ect. It's a viscous never ending cycle. It's railroading..
Not trying to exacerbate a fight on this topic, but to first address what Bucyrus said referencing the aspect of Fatigue, Micro Naps, and effects of Individual Circadian Rhythem cycles on work related Fatigue caused incidents.
Work related fatigue research is not all junk science, Just prior to the turn of the 21st Century, the American Trucking Assoc and DOT got very interest and funded many research projects referencing fatigue, in the Transportation Industry. There was quite a bit of research done in their own facilities with regards to OTR Driver Related issues. I was able to attend several seminars conducted on the subject of fatigue. Much of that research could be transferable to the Railroad Industry as well as Trucking.
Both skill sets for T&E Crews and OTR Drivers require strict attention to details happening out side of their work stations, Repetition of work functions, the main difference is the lack of having to steer for the T&E Crew. Both happen to work over varing segment of daylight to dark conditions and vice-versa. The hardest part of the day for me was immediately pre-sunrise, after having been driving at night. Both groups did have various radios to communicate with their work environment and others around their locations. Toi sit behind a wheel while droning along for a long period of time on a straight strretch of Interstate or other road, is similar to a T&E employee droning along with a strong engine noise filling their whole body with a viberation, while wearing ear plugs(?) contributes to the on set of a Micro-Nap.
I goes without saying that most individuals working an irregular schedule have their Circadian Rhythem all out of sync to their normal.
Human Nature (and its differences) are another aspect of the Human physiology that affects individuals and how they handle their work environment. How do you guarantee (for a Driver/T&E Leasing Service?) that each employee dispatched is "Rested and 100% ready to go to work? It just doesn't happen, too many other circumstances come into play: anything from Car trouble, to sick kids or spouse; can cause an individual to come to work in a fatigued condition. Those kinds of variables are so random as to be almost uncontrollable,IMHO.
All of this is said, and then you get to the real hot button of Union Contracts and those effects on Workplace performance of T&E personnel. I'll let someone else open that can of worms. Most of what I've mentioned is applicable to Large Railroad employees. The other side of that coin is the Short Line employees. I can't speeds to that but I am aware that Short Lines operated an awful lot of trains with one crewman on board. They have to roll at reduced speeds for long periods, admittedly, in some cases I think they do have some help that may be working with them but not on board the train. They work out of a pickup and that help being mobile can keep the engineer from having to detrain to throw switches and other functions to save the engineer from having to get on and off the train.
I am not challenging the validity of sleep disorders. Nor am I proposing how to deal with the problem or endorsing Henry's pool idea. I see the pool as just a way to restructure labor, but offering no particular solution to the sleep problem. I only thow out the terms "junk science" and "settled science" to stake out the subject based on what other can tell us.
I would not be asking the question but for the fact of the absolutly incredible postion on sleep disorders that the NTSB has staked out in their accident report on the Iowa collision. If you listen to the NTSB, the house is on fire. So my only question is this: What are you going to do about it?
That is the core of my concern in starting this thread. I am still waiting for the answer.
And you're not going to get an answer, Bucyrus. No theory or idea will be discussed seriously and no one has any other ideas other than what I proposed. And just because neither you nor I are railroaders, we don't know whereof we speak...and have been asked not to. Or told not to.
henry6And you're not going to get an answer, Bucyrus. No theory or idea will be discussed seriously and no one has any other ideas other than what I proposed.
Oh, there is another idea besides the one you proposed. That is that the railroads, on their own, make sure that none of the operating people have sleep disorders. We are told that we must take sleep disorders very seriously. But I don’t sense that the railroad road industry is taking sleep disorders as seriously as the medical profession or the NTSB is taking them.
Unless they are able to convincingly show with unbiased empirical research that the various sleep disorders are merely "junk science" [and I seriously doubt this] then the pressure from the medical community, the NTSB, unions and litigation will force the railroads to address this issue, whether they want to or not.
According to NSF's 2005 Sleep in America poll, 14% of Americans do shift work . Compared to their day shift counterparts, shift workers are more likely to suffer from insomnia as well as excessive daytime sleepiness (61% vs. 47% and 30% vs. 18% respectively). Shift workers are also more likely to drive while fatigued and almost twice as likely to fall asleep at the wheel.
Within the International Classification of Sleep Disorders (1997, 2001), there are many types. here are the relevant ones:
Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 780.53-0Central Sleep Apnea Syndrome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 780.51-0Central Alveolar Hypoventilation Syndrome . . . . . . . . . . . 780.51-1
Shift Work Sleep Disorder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307.45-1Irregular Sleep-Wake Pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307.45-3Delayed Sleep-Phase Syndrome. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 780.55-0Advanced Sleep-phase Syndrome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 780.55-1Non-24-Hour Sleep-Wake Disorder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 780.55-2Circadian Rhythm Sleep Disorder NOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 780.55-9
It is interesting to see how fast the feds imposed new regulation after that crash in California where the commuter train "engineer" was texting and ran the red signal. The authorities are ready and willing to impose draconian rules as long as it doesn't cost the almighty corporations (or the government) anything. But to address such a serious issue as sleep deprivation, and it seems the onus is on the employee to do something about itn.
Bucyrus [snipped - PDN] There has to be testing just like drug testing. How else can you deal with this kind of threat? You don’t discover a medical condition that is likely to affect many of your employees without checking to see which ones are affected, and which are not. If it is a diagnosable condition, then every employee needs to be checked out to guarantee that they don't have it.
To adapt from Russian Gen. Col. Pavel Leonidovich Alekseyev in Tom Clancy's 1986 military novel Red Storm Rising: "[Running a railroad] is not an exercise in mathematics. We deal with people, not numbers. Numbers have their own special kind of perfection. People remain people no matter what we try to do with them." [emphasis added - PDN]
Not everything in medicine can be diagnosed with a simple blood test. That's why good clinically- experienced diagnosticians have to take the time to check a wide variety of symptoms, rule out, rule in and come up with a Dx if there is one. Definitely true in my field.
Hold up there Henry,
I didn't mention nor do I care if you are or are not a railroader...this isn't the only industry with 24/7 staffing issues, try the petrochemical business, plants and refineries run full bore all the time.
As for not accepting your idea, no, I don't really, but not based on your lack of railroading, but simply because I can't work the numbers to make it cost effective for either the railroad or the Pool Crew company.
Railroads squeeze the payroll dime so tight the poor thing screams!
They will not pay extra on that front even if it means well rested crews....
You will have to show them, and me a marked increase in profits resulting from you pool crew concept before they will even begin to discuss the idea.
Trains magazine had an article back in around 1997? or so, it address the concept of pool crews, along with having a train dedicated to trucks, you drove on, parked, went to a dorm on the train, which had a restaurant, showers, rec room, all that fun stuff.
The train was to be staffed by a pool crew concept, 8 on 8 off, with the crew using the same dorm facilities the truckers did.
It went into great detail about the cost saving to the trucking company, one driver who didn't have to worry about his log book and HOS because he wanst driving anywhere...except when the train reached its final destination, he simply drove off and finished his run.
Great idea, the article covered all the bases, but in the end, the author concluded it would not be profitable to the railroad or the truckers.
Simply put, show me the money....
As for Bucyrus and the junk science...
I think what may be is point is that the NTSB report has a statement that, based on a simple computer questionnaire, the crew could have self-diagnose a sleep disorder, then later in the same report it offers a disclaimer stating the science used in the computer program may need peer review and shouldn't be considered valid until then...so why use that "science" as proof of a sleep issue and then disclaim it?
Sleep disorders are real, documented, and treatable, some with lifestyle changes, some with medication, some require surgery, some can't be treated at all.
I think his issue is this, is the "science" used there is valid, or simply a tool to be used to discipline employees.
If its valid, why the disclaimer,?
If not valid, why try to promote it?
Bucyrus I am not saying it is junk science or settled science, but if it is anywhere in between, it should be full red alert to deal with it. And yet, I don’t sense that it is taken that seriously. So, I am wondering, why is there a disconnect between a newly discovered medical condition that can suddenly render a victim unconscious without warning, and the lackadaisical response to it?
Difference between a proactive and a reactive industry?
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
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.