henry6 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....
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....
Like I said, dont get sand in your crack just because people who know far more than you do about the subject find holes in your plan. Did you just expect folks to welcome it with open arms or something? As far as this inside the box BS you spew, just because I dont go along with your plan doesn't mean I'm close minded, I'm just expressing my right to disagree with you. If you cant take criticism then why bother posting this on a public forum?
I don't think there is a single railroader that hasn't sat around thinking about how to better crew trains. The problem is there is always a tradeoff. The equivalent exchange, if you will, of railroad work: do you want time off and a normal(ish) life or do you want money?
There are money-hungry people out here that would live on the rails if you'd allow them. Whatever the reason, the more work the better. Then you have the opposite extreme - people allergic to overtime. And every flavor in between. Getting them to agree on anything is like herding cats with a water-shooting vacuum cleaner.
Henry6 proposes a contracting service for train crews. Heck, Herzog does that. But herzog doesn't pay into RR retirement, from what I hear. There's also Veolia, and I hear Virgin is getting into the rail business, too (across the pond, I guess). There might even be some contracting firms that supply T&E for shortlines/regional/industries. The big union class-1 guys probably aren't too keen on contracting outfits. Too much stretching the dollar, as others on here have already pointed out. Just look at the crew haulers - Nuff' said.
As far as making guys salary - well, managers are salaried. And even though it can suck in the wallet to get called for basic days or low mileage trains several times in a row (missing out on those high mileage or high OT $$$$$ jobs), we also see how those managers are treated. 100 hours a week+. I fear if we were salaried, we would be used to the last drop every single day, just like Maxwell House. There would be no more basic 8 hour day. I don't want to work 12 hours every day. I've done that for months on end. Money is good, but sheesh... work, sleep, work, sleep, work, sleep is no life.
Now, if you would take a large terminal with trains coming in from several lines and home to a few yards.. you could have crews with regular start times. A large terminal may have different seniority districts covering different lines. And there's yard lists and road lists. Road trains may have assigned crews. Or assigned pools. Or be extra. If you would wipe the slate clean, and (here's the magic word that some railroads are afraid to hear) QUALIFY the men to work different directions and different yards, and the various locals, then I think you could set up a system where you could assign x-number of men to show up at y-time to take a job. Probably wouldn't have advanced knowledge of which job they would hold, so Monday it may be a yard job. Tuesday a local. Wednesday a road train going east. Friday a road train going south. It would give you normalcy in times, but not in the type of work you are doing (or what type of money you are making). Again, equivalent exchange. And you would have to almost do a salary as Henry pointed out.
Heck, I even heard some guys float around an idea where you'd work 2-3 weeks and get a week off. That way you could (well, should) try to concentrate all home activities on the off period, where the work period would be devoted to working and sleeping.
I think that's all for now....(probably put everyone to sleep).
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
Georgia Railroader henry6: 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.... Like I said, dont get sand in your crack just because people who know far more than you do about the subject find holes in your plan. Did you just expect folks to welcome it with open arms or something? As far as this inside the box BS you spew, just because I dont go along with your plan doesn't mean I'm close minded, I'm just expressing my right to disagree with you. If you cant take criticism then why bother posting this on a public forum?
henry6: 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....
Ok...let's hear your better idea.
I don't mind criticism...but don't like out of hand "it won't work because I know better" is not criticism. And real criticism, points of criticism, I have tried to answer or counter with ideas or answers...it seems those who criticize me can't take criticism. If you cant' take criticism and counter answers, they why bother crticizing on a public forum?
I proposed an idea. I expected it to be criticized. I have answers and counter answers which I also expected to be criticized. I don't want to be nor like personal criticism, Unless you can truthfully and factually criticize my plan with other than emotional knee jerk 'we've never done it this way, we can't do it this way, we don't want to do it this way, you can't know because you aren't one of us" then why shouldn't I stand up for my premise and give straight answers? So, please, if you, or anyone else, has a different answer or solution, or constructive crtiticism of my suggestion, please present it without denegrating me or my idea.
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 don't know about you but I prefer people being awake when operating any kind of vehicle .....
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
henry6I don't mind criticism...but don't like out of hand "it won't work because I know better" is not criticism.
Henry,
People who come up with new ideas have to expect criticism. And they also have to expect that some of that criticism will seem unfair or even be unfair. It goes with the territory. The pioneers have to take the arrows. They always say that if you invent a better mousetrap, the world will beat a path to your door. Nothing could be further from the truth. You can invent the perfect mousetrap and the world will howl with derision.
And that’s just for mousetraps. What you are proposing is a monumental change.
I didn't see where anyone said that....
Have seen where guys who do this for a living both endorsed part of your idea, and criticized parts of it.
Haven't seen where it became personal in that anyone attacked you, only the idea.
The "It's my football, and if you don't let me be quarterback I taking the ball and going home" routine is a little below what I expected from you.
What I did expect from you it to debate the idea, deal with each criticism on a one on one basis, each point and exception that was taken I expected you to counter with an expanded explanation....
Crying in your beer won't cut it.
23 17 46 11
I don't drink beer. And I don't cry. I'm actually laughing because I figured that no one would actually be too enthused about the idea, especially railroaders who do, and have always done, the same thing the same way forever and ever..
henry6 I don't drink beer. And I don't cry. I'm actually laughing because I figured that no one would actually be too enthused about the idea, especially railroaders who do, and have always done, the same thing the same way forever and ever..
Hey now, did everyone skip over my reply?
The hallmark of a crewing system that crews can be truly rested and ready for their work is predictability. For train A to have it's crew called at 8 AM every time from the home terminal - work to the away from home terminal in 8-12 hours - marks off and goes to away from home lodging and is rested and ready for the 8 AM return train to the home terminal. That is the ideal - it is not reality.
Now a touch of reality
Crew is called for train A at 8 AM - train arrives at 11:30 having activated a defect detector 30 miles from A and having to set out a car. Crew now has 7'30" to make a 8 hour run - everyone acknowledges this will be a Recrew - but when do you call it and where do you send it (and is this crew actually rested vs. rested by statute and it will take a minimum of 2 hours to get the crew on duty from either home or away terminals - then the recrew will have to be transported to a point to meet the dieing train; normally with a van service that may or may not be on time and may or may not know specifically where to meet the dieing train). The original crew makes their way to their away from home terminal and marks off at 11 PM, having accrued 3 hours 'Limbo Time'; which mean, instead of 10 hours undisturbed rest the crew must have 13 hours undisturbed rest which also means the earliest the crew could go on duty, if they they were notified to show up at the conclusion of their undisturbed period would 12 Noon, if they would be required to answer a call to go on duty, they could get called at 12 Noon and go on duty at 2 PM - either of which will be too late for the assigned return train, if it is on time.
Reality has a way of derailing just about ANY reliance on assigned starting times, and this applies on both ends of the run. My carrier tried a plan to increase the number of Assigned crews several years ago - it broke down as operating specific trains across multiple divisions in the relatively narrow time frames necessary for a assigned crew system to function, When assigned trains don't operate within the required windows to make the system work, the expenses go up either in utilizing 'extra crew' to operate the train on time when the assigned crew isn't rested, and then deadheading the assigned crew to be in position at the other end of the run; or the train is delayed to await the assigned crew coming rested.
At various locations on my company's property, they have implemented virtually any and every crew calling scheme that the brotherhoods have presented to the carrier as enhancing the rest and quality of life - none of those 'test' environments so far have proven good enough for all parties involved to be implemented system wide.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
But if I have a company which employees and assignes crews, a crew called for 8AM witha train that won't show up until 11AM can be moved to another assignment because I have maybe 40 or 50 assignements that morning. My crews are qualified for whatever because my system, my contracts, is designed to deal with what ever should come up. Maybe I know that I have to make out 100 assignments every 24 hours for any number of railroads and situtaitons from my location, not based on railroad locations and bases. PoolCrew has carte blanc in assigning and managing the crews and not antiquated rules, divisions, whatever is now in effect. It is a whole new world with only the cab of the locomotive the same as it is now.
Why do you act so appalled that not everyone goes along with your idea? You pitched an idea that not everyone buys into and now you're kicking dirt around. Get over it. The sun will come up tomorrow and my company will run trains the way they have for years, we will go to work and make money just like we have for years, and without this poolcrew idea. I can take all the criticism in the world, it doesn't bother me in the least, you on the other hand....Like I said dont get all mad when experience points out flaws in the plan.
You will get some friction with the one giant pool idea. Heck, the railroads could easily do that if they wanted to: they would just abolish all regular jobs and slammed everybody onto one giant extra list. Why don't they? Who is going to want to work 30+ years being extra?
Plus, different guys like different kinds of service. Some are road loads, some are yardbirds, and others are local yokels. Most people usually settle in one category, while a few do go back and forth. There's also yardbirds that like one yard but despise another. Road loads that love running to "A", but absolutely detest going to "B". So while working times may get a little more regular - the assignments you work will not. Worth the trade-off for regular hours? I don't think the majority would agree with that.
Point out flaws.. And if you do, send a correction not a condmnation.. Talk in terms of fixing the problem at hand instead of shooting the messenger.
For as long as I can remember, any time the topic of railroad train service employment came up, the first thing to be mentioned was the lousy hours and days off. It has always been complaint number-one. That has probably been the case for over a century. So one has to be skeptical when science and medicine suddenly discovers that irregular work schedules are a deadly serious health and safety hazard. Not saying that the science is not 100% pure and true, but it is an interesting coincidence that it just so happens to be a scientific conclusion that gives labor the one thing they want most. Even if the problem is never eliminated, it is at least a reason to be paid more, or given the same pay for fewer hours.
I can recall not too long ago, there were no theories about night shift fatigue being related to schedule irregularity going back several days or weeks. That had simply never occurred to anyone. The only obvious explanation for being exceptionally tired at night was not getting enough sleep during the previous day. And because the rest of the world was up and running during the daytime, it was easy to get caught up in that flow, getting things done that needed to be done, and not get enough sleep as a consequence. So the general belief was that the main problem with night work was relatively greater difficulty of sleeping during the day. But basically, everybody believed that if you got sufficient sleep during the day, there would be no difficulty in staying awake at night.
But now we know that is not true. Deadly sleep disorders can have a cause that has nothing to do with how much sleep you got the day before. Instead, they can be caused simply by the fact that you work at night and sleep during the day. Or they could be the result of a varying work schedule for the last few weeks. Both of these scenarios can cause deadly sleep disorders in people who have never had any lack of sleep.
So, to me, it seems like the proponents of workplace safety have handed the railroad industry the biggest bombshell ever. The industry has no choice but to deal with it. They have to fix the problem that their scheduling causes. The NTSB has told us that the problem caused the death of the crew last year in the Iowa collision. It is too bad it took over 100 years to discover the problem. I wonder how many other deaths have been caused by railroads forcing their people to work nights.
zugmann You will get some friction with the one giant pool idea. Heck, the railroads could easily do that if they wanted to: they would just abolish all regular jobs and slammed everybody onto one giant extra list. Why don't they? Who is going to want to work 30+ years being extra? Plus, different guys like different kinds of service. Some are road loads, some are yardbirds, and others are local yokels. Most people usually settle in one category, while a few do go back and forth. There's also yardbirds that like one yard but despise another. Road loads that love running to "A", but absolutely detest going to "B". So while working times may get a little more regular - the assignments you work will not. Worth the trade-off for regular hours? I don't think the majority would agree with that.
A: Up to now, there has been no reason or compelling reasons for the railroads or unions to do anything different than what they are already doing. It is not so much as they haven't wanted to as much as it is that they haven't needed to. Fatigue, et al is a problem for them which is being diagnosed in ways it has never been diagnosed before. Therefore whatever they've been doing isn't the cure...something completely different has to be found. And as I, and others have offered, railroading is not the only industry where fatigue is under scrutiny.
B: PoolCrew Company would take into account guys who don't want road jobs, don't want days away from home, want to be home everynight, only switch or yard jobs, only want road jobs, only first trick only second trick, only third trick,, has to have Wednesdays or Tuesday nights off, whatever, PoolCrew Company taylors the work assignments to the individual hired as well as for the railroads under contract.
henry6 B: PoolCrew Company would take into account guys who don't want road jobs, don't want days away from home, want to be home everynight, only switch or yard jobs, only want road jobs, only first trick only second trick, only third trick,, has to have Wednesdays or Tuesday nights off, whatever, PoolCrew Company taylors the work assignments to the individual hired as well as for the railroads under contract.
If PoolCrew could do it, my hat's off to them. But that is a VERY tall order for a railroad terminal. It will involve a lot more people working. Not a bad thing.. but may mean less money for everyone else. That may be a bad thing...
As far as the "bombshell" of night work - meh, I doubt it. The world is a 24/7 environment, not just us, but retail, warehousing, the few factories left, anything dealing with transportation, healthcare, public safety - there will always be people working at night. Period.
zugmann [snip} "...As far as the "bombshell" of night work - meh, I doubt it. The world is a 24/7 environment, not just us, but retail, warehousing, the few factories left, anything dealing with transportation, healthcare, public safety - there will always be people working at night. Period...." [snip]
[snip} "...As far as the "bombshell" of night work - meh, I doubt it. The world is a 24/7 environment, not just us, but retail, warehousing, the few factories left, anything dealing with transportation, healthcare, public safety - there will always be people working at night. Period...." [snip]
Bucyrus said:
".....So, to me, it seems like the proponents of workplace safety have handed the railroad industry the biggest bombshell ever. The industry has no choice but to deal with it. They have to fix the problem that their scheduling causes. The NTSB has told us that the problem caused the death of the crew last year in the Iowa collision. It is too bad it took over 100 years to discover the problem. I wonder how many other deaths have been caused by railroads forcing their people to work nights..."
Work schedules to 365 days, and anytime in a 24 hour day, 7 seven days a week. The Iowa (BNSF) incident was not the the start, but the latest incident, over time. Remember the Colgan Air Crash in the Buffalo, NY area in 2009?
lhttp://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2012/03/faa_seeks_to_fine_regional_air.htm
FTL:"...Continental Connection Flight 3407, which was operated by Colgan for Continental Airlines, crashed on Feb. 12, 2009, near Buffalo, killing 50 people. Although crew scheduling wasn’t an issue in the accident, the National Transportation Safety Board said the performance of both pilots was likely impaired by fatigue. The board blamed the crash on an error by the flight’s captain.
The accident prompted the FAA to overhaul its regulations on flight crew scheduling for the first time in decades in an effort to ensure pilots can get adequate rest..."
As I had previously noted these Fatigue studies date back possibly 15 to 20 years in various concerns expressed by the DOT, and referencing the Transportation Industry.
If anything these incidents have created 'Collateral Damage' within the rail road world. So the regulators are going to do what they do, Regulate. So just brace yourselves for more onerous job rules, at some point, regarding T&E Crews and their hours.
samfp1943 So just brace yourselves for more onerous job rules, at some point, regarding T&E Crews and their hours.
So just brace yourselves for more onerous job rules, at some point, regarding T&E Crews and their hours.
I really don't care. If it happens - it happens. If it doesn't, it doesn't. Just tell me when to go to work, pay me a few bucks, and all is well. If it sucks too much - I'll go find another job.
zugmann As far as the "bombshell" of night work - meh, I doubt it. The world is a 24/7 environment, not just us, but retail, warehousing, the few factories left, anything dealing with transportation, healthcare, public safety - there will always be people working at night. Period.
The bombshell is not the nightwork. The bombshell is the sudden determination that nightwork is killing people, and so it needs to be modified and regulated in a way that makes it safe.
Bucyrus The bombshell is not the nightwork. The bombshell is the sudden determination that nightwork is killing people, and so it needs to be modified and regulated in a way that makes it safe.
Brought to you by people that never had to work nights a day in their life, I'm betting.
Besides, one notation in an obscure report is not what I call a "bombshell". A medical report about the dangers of shift/night work is not a bombshell, either. Pretty much anyone that has worked nights or unpredictable schedules can tell you it ain't the same as working days. But it is a necessary evil. Recommendations by yet another alphabet agency mean little.
I know certain forum posters love to take stuff like this and run, but really, it isn't going to amount to much of anything.
No one forces us to work at night...I don't remember any railroader I ever met who told me someone held a gun on him and forced him to sign up.
I do remember being told, along with the other guys in my class that the hours sucked, holidays were things other people enjoyed, and learning to sleep during the day was a survival tactic.
Every one of us went into this with eyes wide open, (yes, that's a bad pun) but we all were told the pitfalls and the downside.
We were all marked up on the extra board on day one, those that could hack it are still here, those that couldn't are gone.
It's either adapt or fail, in some instances fail means die.
It is a 24 hour a day business, period.
That won't change.
Believe it or not, a lot of the "night crawlers" like working the night shift, its cooler, less traffic, both on the railroad and getting to and from work.
The problem lies in having an extra board that covers day shift, afternoon and night shift all from the same roster, and the bouncing back and forth between all three.
If you could develop a "night extra board" just for the night time runs, you would find the folks that work it were most likely the ones who enjoy the night shift to begin with.
Part of Henry's Pool Crew concept could address just that, let the night crawlers have the night to themselves.
When my daughters were young, I worked the night shift switching the lead and on a relief crew that filled in for road jobs "off days" and loved it.
I am pretty much a night person to begin with, so there was no upset to my circadian rhythm.
On the other hand, the guys off the extra board, even those who were off two shifts before getting the call for a night job, still seemed out of sorts, not on their game as well as normal.
My railroad even explored lead and yard jobs working four 10 hour days with three days off...never could get past the overtime issue though.
Like Zug said, there will always be overtime hogs and money pigs who would work 12 on 8 off if they could get away with it, but trust me, they don't get much done and not to many folks want to work with them.
I think a lot of this problem could be solved at the hiring process level with serious and in depth interviews along with real background checks and a higher standard of acceptance...instead it still works on the good ole boy network a lot more than you would suspect.
One of the first questions the other railroaders will ask a new hire is "who are you kin to?"
That's what gets a lot of guys hired, who they are kin to, (who you know) as opposed to being a person suited to this kind of lifestyle.
There isn't a "one size fits all" solution to this problem of fatigue, and no, I don't have a complete solution either.
Henry addresses part of it, and it isn't that I think there is anything "wrong" with his concept beyond there not being a clear way for the railroad or the unions to profit from it, at least not enough money in it for either one to show interest, and that's what it will take for change to occur.
Sucks, but money talks, and as horrible as it sounds, for railroads, it cheaper for accidents like this to happen and be cleaned up, suits settled and survivors paid than it is to radically alter the way they staff their railroad.
And while I agree this accident could and should have been prevented, on a percentage basis, against how many trains run annually against how many fatal accidents happen, well there is no other transportation industry that can stand up, although I think barge companies are close.
We move more stuff more miles with less trains and less crews than ever before, and the fatalities are on average, dropping.
Go back and look at the stats from say, the golden era of railroading, and you will find a daily death among T&E employees.
Go back only 20 years, and the rate is still twice what it is today.
Not to say any death is acceptable, because it isn't, but realistically, the odds are in favor of it happening.
Is the zero fatality concept a good one?
Yes.
Is it obtainable?
No, I don't think so.
Should we keep trying?
Are the majority of fatal accidents preventable?
Yes, but there is no one solution, and any combination of solutions won't be simple, easy or inexpensive, and until a solution that profits both the railroad and the employee in real, monetary terms shows up, not much will change.
Not pretty, but that's the way railroading works.
See Zugs earlier post, he puts it quite bluntly....if the job sucks too much, he will quit and find another one.
Look at it this way...
If a police officer gets killed in the line of duty, we all mourn, express sympathy, we feel bad for his survivors and express anger and outrage at his or her killer.
But no one ever suggests police officers should not be expected to put themselves in harm's way, it's part of the job after all, and that is what we pay them for, to deal with inherently dangerous situations involving criminals, right?
Guess what...railroading is inherently dangerous.
Locomotives that weigh 220 tons, dragging 9000 trailing tons of stuff are dangerous to be around, ride and work on.
It's part of the job, and we are paid to accept that danger.
All of us are well aware we could get killed, often in silly, stupid ways, sometime in horrible ways, some times for reason that should never be allowed to happen, but that's what we get paid for.
Not macho chest thumping, and not seriously comparing what we do to the dangers of police work, but it is part of the deal we struck.
Could the deal be changed to make it safer?
Yup, but I don't think the public will like what it does to the cost of a lot of the things they buy, and I know the railroads won't like what it does to their bottom line nor will railroaders like what it does to their paycheck.
Currently, it is a risk I am willing to accept.
Bucyrus For as long as I can remember, any time the topic of railroad train service employment came up, the first thing to be mentioned was the lousy hours and days off. It has always been complaint number-one. That has probably been the case for over a century. So one has to be skeptical when science and medicine suddenly discovers that irregular work schedules are a deadly serious health and safety hazard. Not saying that the science is not 100% pure and true, but it is an interesting coincidence that it just so happens to be a scientific conclusion that gives labor the one thing they want most. Even if the problem is never eliminated, it is at least a reason to be paid more, or given the same pay for fewer hours. I can recall not too long ago, there were no theories about night shift fatigue being related to schedule irregularity going back several days or weeks. That had simply never occurred to anyone. The only obvious explanation for being exceptionally tired at night was not getting enough sleep during the previous day. And because the rest of the world was up and running during the daytime, it was easy to get caught up in that flow, getting things done that needed to be done, and not get enough sleep as a consequence. So the general belief was that the main problem with night work was relatively greater difficulty of sleeping during the day. But basically, everybody believed that if you got sufficient sleep during the day, there would be no difficulty in staying awake at night. But now we know that is not true. Deadly sleep disorders can have a cause that has nothing to do with how much sleep you got the day before. Instead, they can be caused simply by the fact that you work at night and sleep during the day. Or they could be the result of a varying work schedule for the last few weeks. Both of these scenarios can cause deadly sleep disorders in people who have never had any lack of sleep. So, to me, it seems like the proponents of workplace safety have handed the railroad industry the biggest bombshell ever. The industry has no choice but to deal with it. They have to fix the problem that their scheduling causes. The NTSB has told us that the problem caused the death of the crew last year in the Iowa collision. It is too bad it took over 100 years to discover the problem. I wonder how many other deaths have been caused by railroads forcing their people to work nights.
I've always been a night owl. Torture for me was waking up before 9-10-11 am. Even back to my school days. Easy for me to stay up late, hard to wake up early. I work nights now, and really have no problem with it. Except to do anything on the weekends, you need to shift your schedule around (yeah, they say you should stay on your work schedule, but there ain't much to do at 3am!) but as Ed pointed out, it means not having to work in the heat of a summer day.
Even our road trains - probably 3/4 of them get called at night. Just how it goes, esp. with the intermodal schedules and so forth.
The more I think about it, I see this problem being addressed with a technological solution. Re-structuring the work so that everybody works regular shifts is just way too much to bite off. And even if you did all that, you would still have people working nightshifts, so the problem will persist from that cause alone. You could spend a fortune trying to diagnose who is and is not subject to sleep disorders, and then medically treating those people affected. And even all that is not going to be a surefire remedy.
No, what is needed is a personal monitoring system. The battle needs to be fought right where the employee falls asleep on the job. It would be like a personal dead man control. It won’t prevent people from falling asleep. But it will prevent them from getting killed if they do fall asleep. We are right at the doorstep of this technologically, so it should not be any big deal to perfect. End of problem.
Bucyrus The more I think about it, I see this problem being addressed with a technological solution. Re-structuring the work so that everybody works regular shifts is just way too much to bite off. And even if you did all that, you would still have people working nightshifts, so the problem will persist from that cause alone. You could spend a fortune trying to diagnose who is and is not subject to sleep disorders, and then medically treating those people affected. And even all that is not going to be a surefire remedy. No, what is needed is a personal monitoring system. The battle needs to be fought right where the employee falls asleep on the job. It would be like a personal dead man control. It won’t prevent people from falling asleep. But it will prevent them from getting killed if they do fall asleep. We are right at the doorstep of this technologically, so it should not be any big deal to perfect. End of problem.
Umm? No.
Again, there's a difference between sleeping, fatigued, exhausted and tired. You can be fatigued, but not falling asleep. But you may lose focus, which is how a lot of people end up hurt or dead.
Perfect 21st century solution though: let's just use technology! Pfft.
There is no silver bullet here, folks. No simple machine, no simple computer program or work rule is going to solve this problem.
zugmann Umm? No. Again, there's a difference between sleeping, fatigued, exhausted and tired. You can be fatigued, but not falling asleep. But you may lose focus, which is how a lot of people end up hurt or dead. Perfect 21st century solution though: let's just use technology! Pfft. There is no silver bullet here, folks. No simple machine, no simple computer program or work rule is going to solve this problem.
Gee, it almost sounds like a problem you don't want to solve. Maybe it is really not that big of a problem after all. Earlier, some had suggested that I was not taking the problem seriously enough. So now I get serious, and I am told that we just will live with this problem. It sounds almost like a pet.
But technologically, it won't be hard to fix. I'll bet you that we actually hear about this breakthrough development within a year. It will be like a dead man control, but it will be far more sophisticated. It will be able to detect whether a person is sleeping, fatigued, exhausted, or tired. It is really not far fetched at all. I'll have to think of a good name for it.
Serious? By proposing some magical bullet? And now you are proposing this bullet will be ready in a year?
Give me a break, Bucyrus. We're discussing actual proposals (And their downfalls) and all you can do is play make-believe with some magical invention.
Still, me and the rest of the operating guys will await eagerly for this magical bullet. Let's all come back to this thread in one year. How about it?
PS. Maybe the problem has no solution. There's people that work daytime, regular shifts that suffer from lack of sleep. I think the downfall is when we started measuring time (or was it when we discovered fire?). Before that, the world was probably simple - sleep when tired, and be awake when not.
mmmm...and what, pray tell, does that tell us of those in the healthcare sector who work nights in our hospitals and urgent care centers and such?
Anyone try working on-call for 72 hour stretches?
zugmann Serious? By proposing some magical bullet? And now you are proposing this bullet will be ready in a year? Give me a break, Bucyrus. We're discussing actual proposals (And their downfalls) and all you can do is play make-believe with some magical invention. Still, me and the rest of the operating guys will await eagerly for this magical bullet. Let's all come back to this thread in one year. How about it? PS. Maybe the problem has no solution. There's people that work daytime, regular shifts that suffer from lack of sleep. I think the downfall is when we started measuring time (or was it when we discovered fire?). Before that, the world was probably simple - sleep when tired, and be awake when not.
I did not say it would be ready in a year, just that we would hear it announced as the solution under development within a year. Probably hear about it from the NTSB. I would not exactly call it a magic bullet though. I will be quite a sophisticated little gizmo.
What's the matter? Can't handle a little "outside-the-box" thinking?
Nah, nothing wrong with thinking outside the box. But thinking outside the realm of reality?
Instead of dealing with the core problem of scheduling crews (if it can be done), you just propose another piece of technology that promises miracles. Snake oil salesmen live on.
And please forgive me if I don't gush over every idea that is "proposed/announced/or under investigation". Wake me when there's something ready to buy or use.
henry6 But if I have a company which employees and assignes crews, a crew called for 8AM witha train that won't show up until 11AM can be moved to another assignment because I have maybe 40 or 50 assignements that morning. My crews are qualified for whatever because my system, my contracts, is designed to deal with what ever should come up. Maybe I know that I have to make out 100 assignments every 24 hours for any number of railroads and situtaitons from my location, not based on railroad locations and bases. PoolCrew has carte blanc in assigning and managing the crews and not antiquated rules, divisions, whatever is now in effect. It is a whole new world with only the cab of the locomotive the same as it is now.
Railroads do change trains on crews. If a train falls down badly, and another crew has been called for another train after that one, they will change assignments. Even though when called to report for a time a train symbol is given, it isn't set in stone.
All you are doing is proposing to replace railroad employed crews with contract crews. You are going to have the same issues the railroads do. You will be hiring the from the same employment pool (that of imperfect human beings) that the railroads hire from. Do you really think that everyone you hire will be perfect? Ready to go to work everytime you call? Sure, you talk about taking into account who wants to work road or yard jobs; days, nights, or weekends, etc. To do that you will have so many extra people you're going to end up paying around minimum wage to keep your company going. And people going to work at 2am, even those that want to, will still have the same issues of alertness, tiredness, what ever you want to call it that every other nightshift worker has at times.
How are you going to assign crews when crew start locations are 50 or miles apart? Sure in some areas different railroads may have crew start locations. In other places, they are farther apart. i'm not sure that you can just tell engr S. Cab to report to Boone today on the UP, Report to Creston on the BNSF tomorrow. They will probably have to go on duty at a central point like Des Moines (If you are going to cover many locations and railroads from one point) and they will deadhead to the work. (When crews are called out of one terminal to protect an assignment at another, we go on duty at our home location and must show a deadhead to and a return deadhead from the other terminal. The time deadheading to the other terminal cuts into available work time. If you use up 1 hr deadheading to, you only have 11 hours left to work.) Unless you are going to have dedicated crews at Boone and Creston. Then you really have not changed much.
Jeff
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.