BaltACD Euclid oltmannd From EHH's point of view you close a hump and convert to flat when you can get the same number of cars classified with roughly the same labor hours paid for and you get to save the cost of maintaining all that hump machinery and jewelry. If you have a hump that's only doing 1000 cars a day, the hump and hump crew might be idle for a good bit of time. Same for the puller crews. Same number of guys might be able to flat switch those 1000 cars, although their slack time and will be much less and capacity "cushion" will also be much less. Having a bit excess capacity helps you catch up when something bad happens, like a derailment sends you slug of traffic after it's cleared up. By converting some many humps to flat so fast, EHH destroyed the "cushion" that helped keep the network fluid, and we get to see the result. To be fair, that's what PSR is all about. Utilize everything to the max. Dry up the "cushion". To be fair once again, EHH is smart enough, experienced enough and old enough to know better than to change so much so fast. He's even admitted it, a bit, lately. They have paid him WAY too much to have him be this sloppy. He should refund some of the money! I understood the premise of Balt’s comment to be about misrepresenting the performance statistics by an evil external villain like Harrison closing yards and claiming false savings while actually destroying the company. But if well-meaning people inside the company cannot agree on whether a yard should be closed for saving money or left open as a “cushion,” why is it so obvious that Harrison is wrong on the matter? How can we conclude that Harrison is causing damage by closing yards when the company can’t even tell us whether they are better off closed or left open? The 'well meaning' people inside the company have been silenced by termination, whenever their voice vary's from EHH's. The well meaning people agree EHH is wrong but are powerless to change EHH's autocratic rule. The changes that have been mandated, have be done without ANY PLAN as to how thing are to be done in light of the changes. Implementing changes is one thing. Implementing changes without a plan as to how those changes are to be performed and included into the operation of the plant as a whole, creates unmanageable chaos.
Euclid oltmannd From EHH's point of view you close a hump and convert to flat when you can get the same number of cars classified with roughly the same labor hours paid for and you get to save the cost of maintaining all that hump machinery and jewelry. If you have a hump that's only doing 1000 cars a day, the hump and hump crew might be idle for a good bit of time. Same for the puller crews. Same number of guys might be able to flat switch those 1000 cars, although their slack time and will be much less and capacity "cushion" will also be much less. Having a bit excess capacity helps you catch up when something bad happens, like a derailment sends you slug of traffic after it's cleared up. By converting some many humps to flat so fast, EHH destroyed the "cushion" that helped keep the network fluid, and we get to see the result. To be fair, that's what PSR is all about. Utilize everything to the max. Dry up the "cushion". To be fair once again, EHH is smart enough, experienced enough and old enough to know better than to change so much so fast. He's even admitted it, a bit, lately. They have paid him WAY too much to have him be this sloppy. He should refund some of the money! I understood the premise of Balt’s comment to be about misrepresenting the performance statistics by an evil external villain like Harrison closing yards and claiming false savings while actually destroying the company. But if well-meaning people inside the company cannot agree on whether a yard should be closed for saving money or left open as a “cushion,” why is it so obvious that Harrison is wrong on the matter? How can we conclude that Harrison is causing damage by closing yards when the company can’t even tell us whether they are better off closed or left open?
oltmannd From EHH's point of view you close a hump and convert to flat when you can get the same number of cars classified with roughly the same labor hours paid for and you get to save the cost of maintaining all that hump machinery and jewelry. If you have a hump that's only doing 1000 cars a day, the hump and hump crew might be idle for a good bit of time. Same for the puller crews. Same number of guys might be able to flat switch those 1000 cars, although their slack time and will be much less and capacity "cushion" will also be much less. Having a bit excess capacity helps you catch up when something bad happens, like a derailment sends you slug of traffic after it's cleared up. By converting some many humps to flat so fast, EHH destroyed the "cushion" that helped keep the network fluid, and we get to see the result. To be fair, that's what PSR is all about. Utilize everything to the max. Dry up the "cushion". To be fair once again, EHH is smart enough, experienced enough and old enough to know better than to change so much so fast. He's even admitted it, a bit, lately. They have paid him WAY too much to have him be this sloppy. He should refund some of the money!
From EHH's point of view you close a hump and convert to flat when you can get the same number of cars classified with roughly the same labor hours paid for and you get to save the cost of maintaining all that hump machinery and jewelry.
If you have a hump that's only doing 1000 cars a day, the hump and hump crew might be idle for a good bit of time. Same for the puller crews. Same number of guys might be able to flat switch those 1000 cars, although their slack time and will be much less and capacity "cushion" will also be much less.
Having a bit excess capacity helps you catch up when something bad happens, like a derailment sends you slug of traffic after it's cleared up.
By converting some many humps to flat so fast, EHH destroyed the "cushion" that helped keep the network fluid, and we get to see the result.
To be fair, that's what PSR is all about. Utilize everything to the max. Dry up the "cushion".
To be fair once again, EHH is smart enough, experienced enough and old enough to know better than to change so much so fast. He's even admitted it, a bit, lately. They have paid him WAY too much to have him be this sloppy.
He should refund some of the money!
I understood the premise of Balt’s comment to be about misrepresenting the performance statistics by an evil external villain like Harrison closing yards and claiming false savings while actually destroying the company.
But if well-meaning people inside the company cannot agree on whether a yard should be closed for saving money or left open as a “cushion,” why is it so obvious that Harrison is wrong on the matter?
How can we conclude that Harrison is causing damage by closing yards when the company can’t even tell us whether they are better off closed or left open?
The 'well meaning' people inside the company have been silenced by termination, whenever their voice vary's from EHH's. The well meaning people agree EHH is wrong but are powerless to change EHH's autocratic rule.
The changes that have been mandated, have be done without ANY PLAN as to how thing are to be done in light of the changes. Implementing changes is one thing. Implementing changes without a plan as to how those changes are to be performed and included into the operation of the plant as a whole, creates unmanageable chaos.
The “well-meaning people” I was referring to as not being able to determine whether a yard should be closed or left in operation are the ones prior to Harrison. So they were not silenced by Harrison. You described them this way:
“Throughout my career, I have seen one operating regime close a yard (flat or hump makes no difference) and then claim $X millions in savings. The next regime comes along and reopens the closed yard and also claim's $X millions in savings. This has happened more times than I care to count. Figure lie and liars figure.”
If these well-meaning regimes cannot agree on the yard closures, how can it be so clear that Harrison is wrong about yard closings?
BaltACD EHH's view has become fuzzy from repeated oxygen shortages. He may have been a railroader in the past. His illness and physical condition have sapped the faculties he once had - the downhill slide stops at six feet below ground.
EHH's view has become fuzzy from repeated oxygen shortages. He may have been a railroader in the past. His illness and physical condition have sapped the faculties he once had - the downhill slide stops at six feet below ground.
Nice strawman you've got there.
Let's stick to the actual points of railroading, please. I'd much rather read about the particulars of flat yard switching operations versus humping, instead of the constant "Evil EHH" montra railfans have gotten so great at.
Go ahead and argue against Hunter Harrison, but do it with facts, not loathful comments which do nothing but fill up space and tack onto your post count.
-------
As for the idea of the network "cushion", I'd love to see more dicsussion about that, because I do think it is one of the underappreciated flaws of PSR. Harrison has proven that he can clearly cut dead wood, and figure out the best *overall* layout for the network, but he seems to have a weak history when it comes to leaving enough capacity.
I personally think that a case study of CP and CN reveal that he did indeed cut too much, but that I also think that this in the long-term has the benefit of ensuring the dead wood is cut away. Harrison has never been around long enough to see his model implemented beyond a few years. But I think one should not underestimate the EHH cycle, which I'll term it. The cycle seems to be:
1. Underperforming railroad exists
2. Uses some form of leverage to enter the railroad
3. Implements a wide array of changes, focused on cutting excess capacity and costs. If it doesn't have a definite purpose, get rid of it. Get down to the bare bones of the operation, increase car velocity, decrease dwell, etc
4. Fumble around a bit in the process of implementing #3, as many people get disguntled through layoffs and changes (or even eliminations) to their segment of the railroad fiefdom system.
5. (Some) metrics improved, after a few years EHH is squeezed out, or leaves, once his doings no longer help the bottom line, since the deadweight is gone.
6. The next generation now has a *very* lean footprint, which they can rebuild upon. Figure out where there needs to be more capacity. You're going to undo some of EHH's changes, but this is going to happen now that you know for sure that you actually do need that capacity or whatever it is.
7. Railroad sees traffic and revenue increases, while performance metrics remain about the same as the railroad resumes running, still leaner and better off than when EHH started.
Now I'll be very interested to see what everybody else thinks of my analysis here. I liken it to pruning bushes: in getting it "into shape", you're going to cut off some healthy bits, along with the dead weight. This might be painful and hurt growth in the short-term, but in the long-term it tends to come back stronger. I don't think this is Harrison's intention, but it seems to have held true throughout his managerial history.
Look at CN, which is now unrivaled in just about every operating category and reaches all three ends of the continent, or CP, which was a complete disaster. Did EHH leave these two railroads in perfect shape? Absolutely not! But I don't see where, beyond a few small areas in each case, places where EHH did tangible long-term "damage" to either CP or CN. On the whole, you have to consider his time in each case to be a net-positive.
Thusly, I see it that EHH is following more or less the same formula at CSX. Yes, there will be short-term brew-ha-ha, without a doubt - we are seeing loads of it, and perhaps he's making more mistakes with the more complex CSX network. And the Wall St cats will get their Benjamins in the short-term. But I think what many forget is that CSX of yore was definitely the weaker of the two eastern giants, despite most analysts agreeing that CSX has the better network. So there is room for improvement, and we'll see how much of it EHH finds, and what his eventual sucessor finds.
Remember, without a doubt railfans were flinging poo at CSX for years and years in a sort of sport, before EHH ever came around. I feel that perhaps even a majority of railfans are following the bandwagon on this one.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Norm48327Bucky, Please, just once, give us a break. You switch directions faster than a rabbit being chased by a hungry coyote.
Dear Mr. Hungry Coyote,
You, as leader of the anti-Euclidians on this forum have been consistent in instantly snapping back with an attack immediately after every comment by Euclid, so I was surprised at your recent inconsistency on the thread about crude by open hopper. I was waiting for your response, but all I heard was crickets.
http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/265013.aspx
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Euclid BaltACD Because you aren't a part of the industry, you can't see how the costs remain. They get shifted to other areas, but they remain nevertheless. Shuffleing deck chairs. I understand your point that anyone who closes a hump yard to save money will not save any money because the costs are shifted elsewhere. All I am asking is that if it is such a slam-dunk conclusion that hump yards are cost effective, how can anybody argue otherwise? I have not heard Harrison's case for this.
BaltACD Because you aren't a part of the industry, you can't see how the costs remain. They get shifted to other areas, but they remain nevertheless. Shuffleing deck chairs.
I understand your point that anyone who closes a hump yard to save money will not save any money because the costs are shifted elsewhere. All I am asking is that if it is such a slam-dunk conclusion that hump yards are cost effective, how can anybody argue otherwise? I have not heard Harrison's case for this.
It works like this. When you are hunting for cost savings in the budget, if you close a yard, you save nearly every line item on the budget and generally ignore the velocity effect on the network.
When you reopen the yard, you count all the congestion relief and car hire efficiencies and balance against the incremental cost.
This happened A LOT in the "old days" before network modeling made the exercises more "honest".
Pre-Staggers, cost was the only big "lever" available to pull to affect the financials.
Norm48327 Euclid Are you saying you would expect me to speculate on the switching accident rather than wait for the results of the investigation? I don’t see anything wrong with speculation as long as you acknowledge what you don’t know. But in this case, there is nothing to speculate on because nobody has reported what happened during the accident. It seems to me that what the union did was go beyond speculation to positive assertion that working conditions caused the accident, and yet they offered no explanation for how that actually occurred. Based on the letter from the union, I will speculate that they want us to believe the accident was caused by Harrison. Bucky, Please, just once, give us a break. You switch directions faster than a rabbit being chased by a hungry coyote. Do you remember the speculation you offered when the Lac Megantic disaster went down? You had all kinds of theoritical speculation back then. Now you are saying you will wait to see the final NTSB report. Why the sudden change in perspective? Is it just to feed your ego and your claim of having 'experience' that you are loathe to and will never divulge? You have been asked many times to show your qualifications to post your opinion as fact yet you are reluctant to do so. Consider it a 'personal attack' if you wish but in spite of many requests you have artfully dodged the questions other forum participants have asked of you either by denieing them answers to their query or totally ignoring them and changing the subject to fit your personal needs. You reminds me of Lucy in the comic strip Peanuts. I will, for what it's worth, offer psychatric help for five cents. You appear to need it. Wake up and smell the brewing coffee. Get a reality check. We are here to discuss railroads not for entertainment of your trolling.
Euclid Are you saying you would expect me to speculate on the switching accident rather than wait for the results of the investigation? I don’t see anything wrong with speculation as long as you acknowledge what you don’t know. But in this case, there is nothing to speculate on because nobody has reported what happened during the accident. It seems to me that what the union did was go beyond speculation to positive assertion that working conditions caused the accident, and yet they offered no explanation for how that actually occurred. Based on the letter from the union, I will speculate that they want us to believe the accident was caused by Harrison.
Bucky,
Please, just once, give us a break. You switch directions faster than a rabbit being chased by a hungry coyote. Do you remember the speculation you offered when the Lac Megantic disaster went down? You had all kinds of theoritical speculation back then. Now you are saying you will wait to see the final NTSB report. Why the sudden change in perspective? Is it just to feed your ego and your claim of having 'experience' that you are loathe to and will never divulge?
You have been asked many times to show your qualifications to post your opinion as fact yet you are reluctant to do so. Consider it a 'personal attack' if you wish but in spite of many requests you have artfully dodged the questions other forum participants have asked of you either by denieing them answers to their query or totally ignoring them and changing the subject to fit your personal needs.
You reminds me of Lucy in the comic strip Peanuts. I will, for what it's worth, offer psychatric help for five cents. You appear to need it.
Wake up and smell the brewing coffee. Get a reality check. We are here to discuss railroads not for entertainment of your trolling.
Norm,
Why don’t you read what I said before imagining an inconsistency of me denying that I speculate, while having speculated about Lac Megantic?
I have never denied that I speculate. I think that is you who always say you refuse to speculate. It is not me. I just said above that I don’t see anything wrong with speculation. So sure, I speculated about the Lac Megantic wreck, the Casselton wreck, and several others. At one level, speculation is simply a plausible explanation. It is part of any detective work. It is entirely different than a jury rendering a verdict based on their speculation.
But as I explained above, I see nothing to speculate about regarding the Nashville switching accident because no details have been given.
EuclidAre you saying you would expect me to speculate on the switching accident rather than wait for the results of the investigation? I don’t see anything wrong with speculation as long as you acknowledge what you don’t know. But in this case, there is nothing to speculate on because nobody has reported what happened during the accident. It seems to me that what the union did was go beyond speculation to positive assertion that working conditions caused the accident, and yet they offered no explanation for how that actually occurred. Based on the letter from the union, I will speculate that they want us to believe the accident was caused by Harrison.
Norm
zugmann Euclid , I will wait for the investigation to tell me what caused it and whether it was Harrison's fault. Who are you, and what have you done with Euclid?
Euclid , I will wait for the investigation to tell me what caused it and whether it was Harrison's fault.
Who are you, and what have you done with Euclid?
Are you saying you would expect me to speculate on the switching accident rather than wait for the results of the investigation? I don’t see anything wrong with speculation as long as you acknowledge what you don’t know. But in this case, there is nothing to speculate on because nobody has reported what happened during the accident.
It seems to me that what the union did was go beyond speculation to positive assertion that working conditions caused the accident, and yet they offered no explanation for how that actually occurred. Based on the letter from the union, I will speculate that they want us to believe the accident was caused by Harrison.
zugmannWho are you, and what have you done with Euclid?
Euclid, I will wait for the investigation to tell me what caused it and whether it was Harrison's fault.
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
Shadow the Cats ownerEuclid the overall physical costs of humping are higher yes however the total overall costs when you reach a certain point of cars IIRC it is somewhere in the 1000 cars a day range becomes cheaper than flat switching. Why does it become cheaper than flat 1 crew pushing a cut up the hill 1 car man uncouples the cars they roll unless prohibited down the hill on their own to their new track and into their new train. Then once there they are made up into a new train and prepared to leave for a new crew to take out of the yard. With flat switching you have multiple crews under EHH running all over the place throwing switches trying to make up new trains. It is harder on the crews and locomotives and cars. There already has been one serious injury due to his cutbacks in Nashville how many more do we need.
Maybe EHH is just eliminating excess capacity in hump yards and in the process, he has to do a little flat switching until things settle down. Regarding your comment on the Nashville accident, I will wait for the investigation to tell me what caused it and whether it was Harrison's fault.
BaltACDBecause you aren't a part of the industry, you can't see how the costs remain. They get shifted to other areas, but they remain nevertheless. Shuffleing deck chairs.
Euclid BaltACD Throughout my career, I have seen one operating regime close a yard (flat or hump makes no difference) and then claim $X millions in savings. The next regime comes along and reopens the closed yard and also claim's $X millions in savings. This has happened more times than I care to count. Figure lie and liars figure. How can there be such controversy over whether closing a hump yard saves money or costs more? In a complex industrial system, I can see how there can be fine points that might be changed to save money, and some controversy over whether they actually will save money. But how in the world can a grand gesture like closing a hump yard leave you with ambiguous results? That seems to show that the efficiency of hump yards is not at all that clear cut. Operationally, the principle should be much more efficient than flat switching, but maybe the staffing overhead just eats up the mechanical efficiency.
BaltACD Throughout my career, I have seen one operating regime close a yard (flat or hump makes no difference) and then claim $X millions in savings. The next regime comes along and reopens the closed yard and also claim's $X millions in savings. This has happened more times than I care to count. Figure lie and liars figure.
How can there be such controversy over whether closing a hump yard saves money or costs more? In a complex industrial system, I can see how there can be fine points that might be changed to save money, and some controversy over whether they actually will save money. But how in the world can a grand gesture like closing a hump yard leave you with ambiguous results?
That seems to show that the efficiency of hump yards is not at all that clear cut. Operationally, the principle should be much more efficient than flat switching, but maybe the staffing overhead just eats up the mechanical efficiency.
Because you aren't a part of the industry, you can't see how the costs remain. They get shifted to other areas, but they remain nevertheless. Shuffleing deck chairs.
BaltACDThroughout my career, I have seen one operating regime close a yard (flat or hump makes no difference) and then claim $X millions in savings. The next regime comes along and reopens the closed yard and also claim's $X millions in savings. This has happened more times than I care to count. Figure lie and liars figure.
Numbers for the week ending just before Labor Day:
Using the standard numbers published on the STB site...
Cars on line: Down 1500. About a thousand tank cars. The rest covered hoppers and open top hoppers. I suspect the tank cars are down due to Harvey. CSX has the chemical coast to chemical coast traffic - not NS.
Dwell: System dwell down almost an hour. This is good, but 27 hours is still way to high. All the humps are ill. Most are over 30 hours and Avon still over 40. Should be in the 22-24 hour range. Was 23 hours in mid May.
Train speed: Up 0.6. Also good. Driven by Merchandise up 0.7 mph. Overall, still not good. About 5 mph lower than mid-May when CSX was trumpeting "improvements"
Cars sitting 24 hours. Empties about the same but loads down about 1400. Still 50% higher than mid-May.
Conclusion: Still in the ditch. Inching upward. CSX's STB weekly report has considerable "happy talk" about improving operations. I'd say, they're still in the ditch with a long way to go.
BaltACDThroughout my career, I have seen one operating regime close a yard (flat or hump makes no difference) and then claim $X millions in savings. The next regime comes along and reopens the closed yard and also claim's $X millions in savings. This has happened more times than I care to count.
Yeah. Me, too! It's almost comical.
jeffhergert oltmannd overall Thanks to all that replied. I am writting this at 7:25pm on labor day. EHH said there would be "noticeable" improvement by labor day. So, how about it? Has anyone "noticed" improvement in CSX service? I would really like to hear from anyone that ships/recieves from CSX. We're gonna have to wait until next Wednesday to see the numbers... I would expect there would be improvement. Especially since CSX changed out they calculate their metrics. Jeff
oltmannd overall Thanks to all that replied. I am writting this at 7:25pm on labor day. EHH said there would be "noticeable" improvement by labor day. So, how about it? Has anyone "noticed" improvement in CSX service? I would really like to hear from anyone that ships/recieves from CSX. We're gonna have to wait until next Wednesday to see the numbers...
overall Thanks to all that replied. I am writting this at 7:25pm on labor day. EHH said there would be "noticeable" improvement by labor day. So, how about it? Has anyone "noticed" improvement in CSX service? I would really like to hear from anyone that ships/recieves from CSX.
Thanks to all that replied. I am writting this at 7:25pm on labor day. EHH said there would be "noticeable" improvement by labor day. So, how about it? Has anyone "noticed" improvement in CSX service? I would really like to hear from anyone that ships/recieves from CSX.
We're gonna have to wait until next Wednesday to see the numbers...
I would expect there would be improvement. Especially since CSX changed out they calculate their metrics.
Jeff
A Fraudster's standard tactic. Publish numbers that have no historical basis for comparison.
Made an appearance at my former dispatching office - to say goodbye, before they leave for Jacksonville.
EHH when he closed the Cumberland Hump, decreed that the remaining Flat Switching had to take place in the 8 tracks of what had been the Recieving Yard. Virtually nothing got switched as there was no room to switch anything to. After a month of gridlock, they were authorized to use the 'trim' end of the Hump Yard to do flat switching. Hump computer and retarders are still in place but haven't been maintained since the hump was 'closed'.
Throughout my career, I have seen one operating regime close a yard (flat or hump makes no difference) and then claim $X millions in savings. The next regime comes along and reopens the closed yard and also claim's $X millions in savings. This has happened more times than I care to count. Figure lie and liars figure.
Murphy's Law:
Drive a train over a cliff and into a deep canyon, it will fall until it hits bottom....
At some point, even Superman cannot save it.
Despite early optimism over Hunter Harrison’s turnaround plan, CSX complaints gather steam
The Globe and Mail (Online) (Toronto, ON) By Eric Atkins September 3, 2017 Investors in Florida-based railway CSX Corp. have enjoyed 37-per-cent returns since news broke in January that noted turnaround man Hunter Harrison was seeking the top job. Since he became CEO in March, it's been a different story for some CSX customers. They complain about missed shipments, lost sales and trains that arrive late or not at all – problems that began with Mr. Harrison's efforts to change the railway's operating model. Mr. Harrison says service will improve as the railway completes the switch to what he calls precision scheduled railroading, a lean operating model he used when he led Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd. and Canadian National Railway Co. But the U.S. regulator, the Surface Transportation Board, has taken note of the complaints from dozens of industry groups and has demanded that CSX provide it with weekly reports on how well its network is moving, including data on congestion at key gateways and interchange traffic with other railways. The STB has called CSX executives to a public hearing on Sept. 12 in Washington, D.C., to explain how the company is fixing the service problems. Rail customers are also expected to present their complaints to the STB, which is an independent government agency charged by Congress to resolve railway rate and service disputes. "The board has received a number of informal complaints from CSX customers regarding increased transit times, unreliable switching operations, inefficient car routings, poor communications and co-ordination with CSX customer service, and acute disruption to customers' business operations," the agency said in a statement. Forty-six U.S. industry groups in the Rail Customer Coalition complained to U.S. lawmakers about "chronic service failures" in the CSX rail network. The railway has "repeatedly" failed to pick up and deliver rail cars, jeopardizing the future of some businesses and the health of the U.S. economy, the group said in a letter. "Major service changes have been imposed with little advance notice, and CSX's response to customer complaints has been woefully inadequate," said the letter, signed by the American Petroleum Institute, the Corn Refiners Association and other groups. Mr. Harrison fired back at the coalition with a letter that called the complaints "unfounded and grossly exaggerated" but said CSX is "aggressively" tackling "some unfortunate disruptions to our service." Executives at Arch Coal Inc. said on a recent conference call with analysts that CSX's rail service deteriorated in the second quarter. The company is experiencing delays moving coal domestically and to ports for export, said John Eaves, CEO of the second-largest U.S. coal producer. "We need and we expect the railroad to perform in the back half of the year," Mr. Eaves said. "We've had a long-term relationship with those guys. It's been a partnership, and we've held up our end of the bargain. We expect those guys to hold up their end of the bargain in the back half of this year." U.S. passenger service Amtrak, which runs on parts of CSX's network, says the freight railroad is not living up to its agreements by delaying passenger trains and inconveniencing its customers, according to a news report last week. "The [on-time performance] and reliability of our service are major components of customer satisfaction and of critical importance to passengers in communities large and small," Amtrak spokeswoman Vernae Graham said in an e-mail, declining an interview on CSX's service. Mr. Harrison was not available for an interview last week, a CSX spokesman said. Under Mr. Harrison's leadership, CSX has cut hundreds of jobs, sidelined 900 locomotives and closed or revamped rail yards. It's a strategy he employed at CP, the railroad he left in January to seek the chief executive job at CSX, with the backing of investor Paul Hilal. News of Mr. Harrison's move sent CSX's share price to a new high, but since he was named CEO the share price has changed little. More than 80 per cent of rail shippers surveyed by U.S. investment bank Cowen Inc. said they have had service problems since Mr. Harrison arrived at CSX. Almost 40 per cent said they switched some shipments to CSX rival Norfolk Southern Corp., and 67 per cent said they moved freight to a trucking company. Jason Seidl, an equities analyst at Cowen, said CSX's problems could boost Norfolk Southern's profit in the second half of 2017. But he said he thinks CSX's problems are "transitory" and that the company will regain the business. "While it is painful for many shippers today, we expect that over the next 12 to 18 months CSX customers will be more pleased with the … service quality." In a letter to the STB, Mr. Harrison called the changes he was implementing at CSX "profound, transformational," adding that "changes of this magnitude tend to give rise to temporary challenges." He said the company's response to congestion and service problems includes adding staff at "challenged" parts of the network to improve communications with customers and restoring operations at one rail yard. "I remain confident that as CSX implements its [precision scheduled railroading] model, customers will receive a markedly superior product," he wrote.
By Eric Atkins
September 3, 2017
Investors in Florida-based railway CSX Corp. have enjoyed 37-per-cent returns since news broke in January that noted turnaround man Hunter Harrison was seeking the top job.
Since he became CEO in March, it's been a different story for some CSX customers. They complain about missed shipments, lost sales and trains that arrive late or not at all – problems that began with Mr. Harrison's efforts to change the railway's operating model.
Mr. Harrison says service will improve as the railway completes the switch to what he calls precision scheduled railroading, a lean operating model he used when he led Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd. and Canadian National Railway Co.
But the U.S. regulator, the Surface Transportation Board, has taken note of the complaints from dozens of industry groups and has demanded that CSX provide it with weekly reports on how well its network is moving, including data on congestion at key gateways and interchange traffic with other railways.
The STB has called CSX executives to a public hearing on Sept. 12 in Washington, D.C., to explain how the company is fixing the service problems. Rail customers are also expected to present their complaints to the STB, which is an independent government agency charged by Congress to resolve railway rate and service disputes.
"The board has received a number of informal complaints from CSX customers regarding increased transit times, unreliable switching operations, inefficient car routings, poor communications and co-ordination with CSX customer service, and acute disruption to customers' business operations," the agency said in a statement.
Forty-six U.S. industry groups in the Rail Customer Coalition complained to U.S. lawmakers about "chronic service failures" in the CSX rail network. The railway has "repeatedly" failed to pick up and deliver rail cars, jeopardizing the future of some businesses and the health of the U.S. economy, the group said in a letter. "Major service changes have been imposed with little advance notice, and CSX's response to customer complaints has been woefully inadequate," said the letter, signed by the American Petroleum Institute, the Corn Refiners Association and other groups.
Mr. Harrison fired back at the coalition with a letter that called the complaints "unfounded and grossly exaggerated" but said CSX is "aggressively" tackling "some unfortunate disruptions to our service."
Executives at Arch Coal Inc. said on a recent conference call with analysts that CSX's rail service deteriorated in the second quarter. The company is experiencing delays moving coal domestically and to ports for export, said John Eaves, CEO of the second-largest U.S. coal producer.
"We need and we expect the railroad to perform in the back half of the year," Mr. Eaves said. "We've had a long-term relationship with those guys. It's been a partnership, and we've held up our end of the bargain. We expect those guys to hold up their end of the bargain in the back half of this year."
U.S. passenger service Amtrak, which runs on parts of CSX's network, says the freight railroad is not living up to its agreements by delaying passenger trains and inconveniencing its customers, according to a news report last week. "The [on-time performance] and reliability of our service are major components of customer satisfaction and of critical importance to passengers in communities large and small," Amtrak spokeswoman Vernae Graham said in an e-mail, declining an interview on CSX's service.
Mr. Harrison was not available for an interview last week, a CSX spokesman said.
Under Mr. Harrison's leadership, CSX has cut hundreds of jobs, sidelined 900 locomotives and closed or revamped rail yards. It's a strategy he employed at CP, the railroad he left in January to seek the chief executive job at CSX, with the backing of investor Paul Hilal. News of Mr. Harrison's move sent CSX's share price to a new high, but since he was named CEO the share price has changed little.
More than 80 per cent of rail shippers surveyed by U.S. investment bank Cowen Inc. said they have had service problems since Mr. Harrison arrived at CSX. Almost 40 per cent said they switched some shipments to CSX rival Norfolk Southern Corp., and 67 per cent said they moved freight to a trucking company.
Jason Seidl, an equities analyst at Cowen, said CSX's problems could boost Norfolk Southern's profit in the second half of 2017. But he said he thinks CSX's problems are "transitory" and that the company will regain the business. "While it is painful for many shippers today, we expect that over the next 12 to 18 months CSX customers will be more pleased with the … service quality."
In a letter to the STB, Mr. Harrison called the changes he was implementing at CSX "profound, transformational," adding that "changes of this magnitude tend to give rise to temporary challenges."
He said the company's response to congestion and service problems includes adding staff at "challenged" parts of the network to improve communications with customers and restoring operations at one rail yard. "I remain confident that as CSX implements its [precision scheduled railroading] model, customers will receive a markedly superior product," he wrote.
From outside looking in, CSX is in BIG trouble.
NS and CSX have parallel routes from Cleveland to Buffalo, near me. CSX usually has 3-4 trains per NS train on a normal day.
Last time I was trackside, NS ran 4 trains per 1 on CSX.
The 1 CSX train? Normal length. NS trains? Normal length, save for the trailer/container train. It was a bit longer than most had been on NS for a while.
Next group was again 3-4 NS and 1 CSX. This CSX train was shorter than most. (~45 intermodal cars.)
I did not see another CSX train that day.
The time before that? 3 NS, 0 CSX. The NS trains were long. (22K {intermodal} needed 3 loco's, 310 {manifest freight} had 3 as well, but was very long, with 100+ freight cars.) (I lost count....)
So, from my area anyways, CSX is in one big mess.
Not to mention the "runaway" issues they have had of late...
Ricky W.
HO scale Proto-freelancer.
My Railroad rules:
1: It's my railroad, my rules.
2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.
3: Any objections, consult above rules.
Of course IM dropped 300 shipments. That would be the close to 900 trailers and containers that UPS shipped a week between Boston and Chicago alone a week. CSX better get its crap together or their excutives are going to be going where did all our High paying customers go and then going how did we end up bankrupt in a hurry.
This weeks numbers: CSX is still in the ditch, but inched upward a bit. Looking at the EP-724 reports since CSX has decided to take it's marbles home from the AAR site,
Trains speed: Flat.
Dwell: System dwell dropped over an hour. This is good. Avon much better, but still not healthy. Waycross and Queensgate have caught a cold, though.
Cars on line: Down 1000. Nearly all covered hoppers.
Cars sitting 48 hours: dropped about 10%, but still an order of magnitude worse than NS.
Shipments: carload up about 1700, intermodal down 300.
Conclusion: A little bit better. CSX is hanging it's hat on Labor Day slack period to get everything sorted. We'll know in a couple weeks if that worked, and then about a month later, if it stuck. If you are under-resourced, these "resets" work for a bit, but then things slide back down hill.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.