BaltACDYou have been claiming the vetting is the answer to everything.
Please show where I state that.
BaltACDWhich shows how little you know about either the operating environment or the office environment.
My, my aren't we a bit testy. Are you getting enough fiber in your diet?
243129 BaltACD You have been claiming the vetting is the answer to everything. Please show where I state that. BaltACD Which shows how little you know about either the operating environment or the office environment. My, my aren't we a bit testy. Are you getting enough fiber in your diet?
BaltACD You have been claiming the vetting is the answer to everything.
BaltACD Which shows how little you know about either the operating environment or the office environment.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
I think both Balt and Joe are very knowledgeable in the areas of their careers, Joe as an engineer and Balt with the dispatching area. The trouble is when they step outside those areas.
Murphy SidingI think I can see why no one takes you seriously, here, at Amtrak or anywhere else for that matter. 1) You can't communicate effectively with others. 2) You don't deal well with any kind of criticism. 3)You have never learned how to effectively interact with those who aren't willing to concede that you know everything and that the only opinion that matters is your own.
I respond to your post yet you choose to reference another post in an effort to chastise me?
When I am challenged I can provide proof, when someone wishes to put their own spin on statements I have made I will confront them for proof. I have provided the explanations you requested but instead of responding on topic you choose to criticize and chastise.
I am reactive, not proactive, when attacked I will react. You play nice. I play nice. Take your choice.
charlie hebdo I think both Balt and Joe are very knowledgeable in the areas of their careers, Joe as an engineer and Balt with the dispatching area. The trouble is when they step outside those areas.
243129 Murphy Siding I think I can see why no one takes you seriously, here, at Amtrak or anywhere else for that matter. 1) You can't communicate effectively with others. 2) You don't deal well with any kind of criticism. 3)You have never learned how to effectively interact with those who aren't willing to concede that you know everything and that the only opinion that matters is your own. I respond to your post yet you choose to reference another post in an effort to chastise me? When I am challenged I can provide proof, when someone wishes to put their own spin on statements I have made I will confront them for proof. I have provided the explanations you requested but instead of responding on topic you choose to criticize and chastise. I am reactive, not proactive, when attacked I will react. You play nice. I play nice. Take your choice.
Murphy Siding I think I can see why no one takes you seriously, here, at Amtrak or anywhere else for that matter. 1) You can't communicate effectively with others. 2) You don't deal well with any kind of criticism. 3)You have never learned how to effectively interact with those who aren't willing to concede that you know everything and that the only opinion that matters is your own.
Joe: You provide factual information more than most. You tend to avoid commenting on topics outside your range of experience. Others do not though that's OK. As I see it, and I speak from past kertuffles with you, you are too quick to hit hard when you see others aren't playing nice with you or acting like experts about stuff they are clueless about. It's really not worth it as some of this is based on long-standing dynamics far beyond your time on the forum.
charlie hebdo It's really not worth it as some of this is based on long-standing dynamics far beyond your time on the forum
As I said I am reactive not proactive. I treat folks with respect and expect to be treated that way in kind. Perhaps I react too quickly, I shall have to work on that as I am not well versed in 'forum dynamics'
Murphy SidingYeah, yeah, yeah. I'm quoting you in the posts and you've just proved all three assertions.
Quoting me in the posts? Where? Present your case.
243129 Murphy Siding Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm quoting you in the posts and you've just proved all three assertions. Quoting me in the posts? Where? Present your case.
Murphy Siding Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm quoting you in the posts and you've just proved all three assertions.
243129 243129 BaltACD You have been claiming the vetting is the answer to everything. Please show where I state that. BaltACD Which shows how little you know about either the operating environment or the office environment. My, my aren't we a bit testy. Are you getting enough fiber in your diet? I think I can see why no one takes you seriously, here, at Amtrak or anywhere else for that matter. 1) You can't communicate effectively with others. 2) You don't deal well with any kind of criticism. 3)You have never learned how to effectively interact with those who aren't willing to concede that you know everything and that the only opinion that matters is your own.
I think I can see why no one takes you seriously, here, at Amtrak or anywhere else for that matter. 1) You can't communicate effectively with others. 2) You don't deal well with any kind of criticism. 3)You have never learned how to effectively interact with those who aren't willing to concede that you know everything and that the only opinion that matters is your own.
Is this not you?
Murphy Siding 243129 Murphy Siding Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm quoting you in the posts and you've just proved all three assertions. Quoting me in the posts? Where? Present your case. 243129 243129 BaltACD You have been claiming the vetting is the answer to everything. Please show where I state that. BaltACD Which shows how little you know about either the operating environment or the office environment. My, my aren't we a bit testy. Are you getting enough fiber in your diet? I think I can see why no one takes you seriously, here, at Amtrak or anywhere else for that matter. 1) You can't communicate effectively with others. 2) You don't deal well with any kind of criticism. 3)You have never learned how to effectively interact with those who aren't willing to concede that you know everything and that the only opinion that matters is your own. Is this not you?
I don't understand your question: "Is this not you?" What you quoted above was said by you, but above, you attribute it to Joe.
Or does your question mean, is this person you describe with all the deficiencies Joe? You certainly intended that to describe Joe. He might disagree with your conclusions about him though.
So where are you quoting me in the posts? I, and I see that am not alone, cannot decipher what you are saying.
243129 Here is a template for hiring, vetting and training procedures that I presented to the Amtrak Chief Transportation Officer in 2015. They felt that they had a better idea. Hiring and Training Template for Train and Engine Service EmployeesAmtrak is rife with inexperience from top to bottom. Since it's inception Amtrak, eschewing the knowledge and experience of the veteran workforce it inherited in the 1983 takeover of operations on the Northeast Corridor (NEC), has used hit and miss trial and error tactics and nowhere is it more apparent than in their hiring and training procedures which have resulted in many incidents, most notably the incidents in Philadelphia involving the 'wrong way train' and the tragedy at Frankford Junction which could quite possibly have been avoided through vetting and proper training by experienced operations personnel not those of questionable pedigree that Amtrak chooses to employ.That being said I have a template for hiring and training of operations personnel. It is a comprehensive and multifaceted program.I have experienced operations personnel for an oversight committee made up of seasoned T&E veterans which can also screen prospective candidates, advise instructors, conduct field testing and evaluate trainees. Seasoned operations veterans can better assess the acumen for train operations a candidate possesses than a non experienced in operations Human Resources employee.Physical ability. Candidates must be able to pass a physical agility screening. How can one assist in an evacuation situation if that person cannot safely and without assistance evacuate themselves?OJT, OJT and more OJT. Nothing beats on the job training. Real-time situations with the accompanying conditions in all classes of service. Basic rules at the outset, more instruction midway, intense instruction at the end of OJT to be followed by final examination. All instructions on rules and special instructions are to be tailored to situations on the division for which hired. This way there is a mental picture when applying the rules. No 'generic' rules situations. Physical characteristics for engineers are extremely important and the candidate must exhibit intimate knowledge of such. Testing will be conducted by veteran engineers with 35 or more years of experience in all classes of service.Train handling for engineers, which I suspect is one of the culprits in the recent rash of crude oil derailments, instruction should be intense and evaluated strictly.Car handling for train service candidates should be extensive and equally intense.Present operating employees and supervision, most of who are 'victims' of Amtrak's inadequate training program, would be subject to evaluation and field testing and if need be assigned to other duties should they not measure up. No loss of job to present employees. Create a new position for those who cannot attain the standards for participating in train operations i.e. “ticket taker” where the individual would only be involved in collecting revenue and have nothing to do with train operations. They can observe operations and benefit with what would be considered 'paid training'. Seniority would be preserved in the craft from which they came should they be able to pass the required exams/tests at a later time.Amtrak must shed its arrogance and acknowledge its shortcomings and yield to the willing assistance from seasoned active and retired operations employees.Amtrak in its present state is an accident waiting to happen.
Here is a template for hiring, vetting and training procedures that I presented to the Amtrak Chief Transportation Officer in 2015. They felt that they had a better idea.
Hiring and Training Template for Train and Engine Service EmployeesAmtrak is rife with inexperience from top to bottom. Since it's inception Amtrak, eschewing the knowledge and experience of the veteran workforce it inherited in the 1983 takeover of operations on the Northeast Corridor (NEC), has used hit and miss trial and error tactics and nowhere is it more apparent than in their hiring and training procedures which have resulted in many incidents, most notably the incidents in Philadelphia involving the 'wrong way train' and the tragedy at Frankford Junction which could quite possibly have been avoided through vetting and proper training by experienced operations personnel not those of questionable pedigree that Amtrak chooses to employ.That being said I have a template for hiring and training of operations personnel. It is a comprehensive and multifaceted program.I have experienced operations personnel for an oversight committee made up of seasoned T&E veterans which can also screen prospective candidates, advise instructors, conduct field testing and evaluate trainees. Seasoned operations veterans can better assess the acumen for train operations a candidate possesses than a non experienced in operations Human Resources employee.Physical ability. Candidates must be able to pass a physical agility screening. How can one assist in an evacuation situation if that person cannot safely and without assistance evacuate themselves?OJT, OJT and more OJT. Nothing beats on the job training. Real-time situations with the accompanying conditions in all classes of service. Basic rules at the outset, more instruction midway, intense instruction at the end of OJT to be followed by final examination. All instructions on rules and special instructions are to be tailored to situations on the division for which hired. This way there is a mental picture when applying the rules. No 'generic' rules situations. Physical characteristics for engineers are extremely important and the candidate must exhibit intimate knowledge of such. Testing will be conducted by veteran engineers with 35 or more years of experience in all classes of service.Train handling for engineers, which I suspect is one of the culprits in the recent rash of crude oil derailments, instruction should be intense and evaluated strictly.Car handling for train service candidates should be extensive and equally intense.Present operating employees and supervision, most of who are 'victims' of Amtrak's inadequate training program, would be subject to evaluation and field testing and if need be assigned to other duties should they not measure up. No loss of job to present employees. Create a new position for those who cannot attain the standards for participating in train operations i.e. “ticket taker” where the individual would only be involved in collecting revenue and have nothing to do with train operations. They can observe operations and benefit with what would be considered 'paid training'. Seniority would be preserved in the craft from which they came should they be able to pass the required exams/tests at a later time.Amtrak must shed its arrogance and acknowledge its shortcomings and yield to the willing assistance from seasoned active and retired operations employees.Amtrak in its present state is an accident waiting to happen.
According to personnel still in the workforce, Amtrak, to this day has engineers running trains that should never have been qualified to, train service personnel who cannot even change/replace a burst air hose which has resulted in major delays and sundry other incidents which will eventually lead to another human error disaster.
What is this a result of? Yup, you guessed, it poor vetting, poor training and poor(er) supervision.
243129What is this a result of? Yup, you guessed, it poor vetting, poor training and poor(er) supervision.
I think it is much more a result of 'incorrect' hiring policies, most notably what might be considered politically-correct ones.
To an extent these are probably imposed on Amtrak externally, and perhaps are less than completely 'documented'. "Vetting" is at least partly the finding of personality traits unrelated to nominal hiring criteria, so it becomes even more important when primary selection is on 'non-railroad-safety' grounds. Proper training then becomes critical in the sense that it needs to be made relevant, familiar, and then second-nature to people with very different mindsets from historical 'safety-first' railroader culture.
I don't think it is entirely fair to blame supervision for employees who were never properly qualified in the first place, or 'can't' change an air hose or knuckle, or did not get the combination of vetting and training that would have 'weeded them out' before going into service critically unprepared to follow the true safe course. A very real problem occurs when you give 'supervisory personnel' both the authority and the responsibility to do that weeding-out: you give carte blanche to the weed weasel types to find 'more' excuses for people they don't like, and opportunity to support their pets.
Overmodyou give carte blanche to the weed weasel types to find 'more' excuses for people they don't like, and opportunity to support their pets.
One possible definition for "people they don't like" is people who are competent, but don't toady up to the weed-weasel types. Which leaves....
Legendary in the fire service are to firefighter's whose breathing apparatus always seems to malfunction when it's time to go after the "big one..."
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
OvermodI think it is much more a result of 'incorrect' hiring policies, most notably what might be considered politically-correct ones.
I would hate to think that the airlines would do this when hiring pilots.
Vetting by a panel of veteran operations personnel should be able to alleviate the non-suitable and perhaps they could be placed in a position more suited to their acuity.
OvermodI don't think it is entirely fair to blame supervision for employees who were never properly qualified in the first place, or 'can't' change an air hose or knuckle
Most supervision on my former home division did not have the knowledge to instruct newbies on basic 'emergencies' such as burst air hoses or knuckles. I have quizzed some of the new hires on what their procedure would be if one of the aforementioned incidents occurred. More often than not the reply was; "oh we would just call somebody".
OvermodA very real problem occurs when you give 'supervisory personnel' both the authority and the responsibility to do that weeding-out: you give carte blanche to the weed weasel types to find 'more' excuses for people they don't like, and opportunity to support their pets.
The panel I recommend in my presentation would hopefully eliminate that possibility.
Who vets the vetters? And how do we keep it from becoming a breeding ground of nepotism and outright discrimination?
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
zugmann Who vets the vetters? And how do we keep it from becoming a breeding ground of nepotism and outright discrimination?
......and who would vet the vetters who vet the vetters who vet the vetters
A panel would hopefully mitigate that condition.
To those it may concern:
If you mean black and brown people are being hired to meet quotas even though they aren't qualified, then please just say that.
I have no idea if that's the case or not. Maybe it is. But before I buy in, I'd like to see some evidence.
Only doing the dog-whistling does not make your points clear, or provide any proof of the "politically correct" hiring preferences alleged.
tree68Legendary in the fire service are the firefighters whose breathing apparatus always seems to malfunction when it's time to go after the "big one..."
Malfunction before or after they actually get into the flames and smoke?
Lithonia OperatorI you mean black and brown people are being hired to meet quotas even though they aren't qualified, then please just say that.
There's a potential aspect of that. I purposely don't cite it because it feeds knee-jerk prejudices on both extremes of the political spectrum.
The point is that Amtrak, as a Federal agency, is subject to political meddling into whatever kinds of 'remediation of result' might be deemed desirable -- this might be 'people of color'; folks with different sexual preference or identity; traditionally underrepresented groups such as women or Native Americans; veterans; folks with a history of financial or educational disadvantage ... there's probably a long list, and I would not rule out people or groups that key legislators find attractive or important, or that have 'pull' in the appropriate parts of the Washington system.
Who they are is much less important in the present discussion than is the need to provide proper and effective support to get them into the right mindset to succeed as safety-conscious railroaders. Personally, I found the kinds of support being provided by the Amtrak 'school' to be lacking in a number of key respects, perhaps precisely because some of them would involve approaches tied to 'proscribed' ethnic or other characteristics that might be considered either condescending or 'racist' in the extended sense so beloved of many current social 'warriors'. It has been, and probably will continue to be, difficult to separate fair accommodation in training from condescension.
Frankly I'm in favor of extending employment and training opportunities to many 'historically-underrepresented' people (or to folks who may make excellent railroaders but haven't been exposed to sufficient classical education or experience to give them a 'leg up' on doing the work. A large part of initial vetting consists of determining what I call 'coachability' -- the ability to learn and remember, to take to heart the gist of information that is conveyed in training, to ask about something that is not fully understood in the course of normal training ... but not the ability to kiss up to instructors (or weed weasels, come to mention it) or lack enthusiasm to learn 'the right stuff' as a way of reaction. (The Marine Corps training is supposed to inculcate a direct and positive response to following orders; it might be thought that a similar approach to 'remembering and following rules' might be a model for training, but many posts here and in other threads indicate a different and 'more nuanced' approach would often be preferable.)
Overmod tree68 Legendary in the fire service are the firefighters whose breathing apparatus always seems to malfunction when it's time to go after the "big one..." Malfunction before or after they actually get into the flames and smoke?
tree68 Legendary in the fire service are the firefighters whose breathing apparatus always seems to malfunction when it's time to go after the "big one..."
Before...
This is where I disagree with Joe. Experienced, highly capable operating personnel should have input into developing a vetting process but not doing it.
I'm not sure about supervision.
A little nepotism might not necessarily be a bad thing. Now before everyone hits the ceiling on this let me explain.
Years back on a "Christmas in Colorado" we (myself, Lady Firestorm, and Mom and Dad) visited the Colorado Railroad Museum in Golden. One of the items on display was a personnel roster book of road crews. There were four men on the list with the same last name. My father noticed it first and with a "Hey, look at this..." exclaimation brought it to my attention."
"Not unusual for those days Dad," I said. "That could be a father and three sons, or a father and an uncle and two sons, or four brothers for that matter. Railroads used to like hiring members of the same family, especially if the father was a veteran employee. The family was a known quantity, in addition to the old belief that an apple doesn't fall too far from the tree."
"And of course, if you loused up on the job not only would you catch hell from your supervisor, you'd get it even worse from Dad when you got home! And your brothers and probably Mom too!"
A different day and age, I know, but sometime I have to wonder if the old-timers were just a little bit smarter about certain things than we are today.
OK, now everyone can get back to venting about things we have no control over.
charlie hebdo This is where I disagree with Joe. Experienced, highly capable operating personnel should have input into developing a vetting process but not doing it.
This could be known as "how do we make sure we don't hire people who are going to take our jobs?"
charlie hebdoI'm not sure about supervision.
The Peter Principle is undoubtedly still alive and well...
That said...
I know of someone whose attention to detail is second to none. But I wouldn't want to put my life in his hands.
charlie hebdo This is where I disagree with Joe. Experienced, highly capable operating personnel should have input into developing a vetting process but not doing it. I'm not sure about supervision.
Why wouldn't those with hands-on experience be directly involved with the vetting. Who better to assess acuity for the position?
The other question is who is going to want to be a vetter? Most guys I worked with that had 30+ years just want to work their regular (usually daylight) job and go home. And once retired, have lots of other things to catch up on/do (don't we all?) Are we really going to have much of a choice of people WANTING to do HR work?
Amtrak has RFEs and rules department people. How many engineers of 30+ years have been willing to go into those jobs? And why do we think a council of elders on Amtrak would be able to draw more?
I'm with Joe. Some people with hands-on experience are vital to the process.
Lithonia Operator I'm with Joe. Some people with hands-on experience are vital to the process.
I don't know about other railroads, but part of the vetting process really is done during the training portion. Conductors and engineers are supposed to fill out a daily evaluation after each tour of duty. I remember one guy in my new hire class who didn't make it through the OJT. He was sttugling a bit and realized it wasn't for him after some frank discussions.
The hard part sometimes is getting the right experienced people to take on students. Some don't want to. They also changed (and shortened up) the new hire training program. They used to assign a new hire to a specific conductor for a set period of time. That still happens on assigned jobs like yard and locals, but now on the unassigned through freight pool they have them work first in - first out. Instead of working with one person for awhile, they work with whom ever they happen to catch. While that may be ok after a new hire has some experience, at first they really need to work with a good trainer to establish a good grasp of the basics.
The worst was 10 or so years ago when they were training a large number of new hires out of Chicago. For their road familiarization trips, they assigned two or three new hires to a 'super' conductor for a trip. This conductor wasn't the train's actual conductor, just a trainer who was riding the trailing engine with his charges pointing out the territory.
Jeff
jeffhergert just a trainer who was riding the trailing engine with his charges pointing out the territory.
That's what I mean about inadequate(poor) training. Learning the physical characteristics from the trailing unit? Really? The unknowing teaching the unknowing.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.