Paul of CovingtonI suspect management may already be eyeing a solution: robot trains. Nothing can go wrong...
You misspelled the operative word. As in the original, it should be 'worng'...
(And perhaps repeated, as in the posters, as the carnage begins to happen?)
I suspect management may already be eyeing a solution: robot trains. Nothing can go wrong.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Euclid BaltACD Transportation business KNOWS it will need 500 engineers in the next two years. Vetting of the applicants to the feeder system to generate the engineers in two years time gives you 100 acceptable individuals. You still will need 500 in two years. What do you do? The continuation of your business depends upon having the positions staffed! If vetting takes out 400 of 500 candidates, and you need 500 candidates, you need to start with 2,500 candiates instead of 500. What makes you think that vetting 500 will leave you with only 100? I would expect that vetting 500 would leave 450 at the very least.
BaltACD Transportation business KNOWS it will need 500 engineers in the next two years. Vetting of the applicants to the feeder system to generate the engineers in two years time gives you 100 acceptable individuals. You still will need 500 in two years. What do you do? The continuation of your business depends upon having the positions staffed!
Transportation business KNOWS it will need 500 engineers in the next two years. Vetting of the applicants to the feeder system to generate the engineers in two years time gives you 100 acceptable individuals. You still will need 500 in two years. What do you do? The continuation of your business depends upon having the positions staffed!
If vetting takes out 400 of 500 candidates, and you need 500 candidates, you need to start with 2,500 candiates instead of 500.
What makes you think that vetting 500 will leave you with only 100? I would expect that vetting 500 would leave 450 at the very least.
As I remember the numbers from those attending the hiring sessions to those actually offered a job, and then to make it through the probationary period, 100 out of 500 is on the optimistic side.
Of course that was when they had large numbers applying. Since those days, when they do have openings they have trouble getting people to apply. That's partly why they offered hiring bonuses a while back. That and to put them on the spot so if they got furloughed, they had to come back when recalled.
Jeff
Overmod Euclid: this presupposes you can attract a cohort of 2500 prospective employees of appropriate 'right stuff' who are also willing to suffer the increasingly strange and onerous conditions associated with railroad service. My guess is that after the "500" or so, you're increasingly getting people who either fail tests for one or more of the traits (and I suspect this will be found to include, say, lower propensity to acquire sleep apnea, etc. in conditions of chronic irremediated stress) or lack the correct approach to 'coachability' to learn the right lessons as they train and then work.
Euclid: this presupposes you can attract a cohort of 2500 prospective employees of appropriate 'right stuff' who are also willing to suffer the increasingly strange and onerous conditions associated with railroad service. My guess is that after the "500" or so, you're increasingly getting people who either fail tests for one or more of the traits (and I suspect this will be found to include, say, lower propensity to acquire sleep apnea, etc. in conditions of chronic irremediated stress) or lack the correct approach to 'coachability' to learn the right lessons as they train and then work.
No, I am saying that I think the reasons why this can't work are being exaggerated by those who don't want solutions to problems. Having the "right stuff" does not need to require some sort of super hero status as might be implied by the general perception of the term. We are merely talking about vetting to eliminate people with certain personality traits that would be hard or impossible to correct by training. For instance, an inability to take full responsibility for their actions as required, would be something to look for. Maybe current screening would catch that, but I doubt that such screening exists.
You are not the Master Vetter!
The Master Vetter would have interviewed thousands to get his 100 acceptable candidates and still be 400 short of the requirements.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
jeffhergert SD70Dude Hire everyone who applies, and then have the weed weasels run around 24/7 trying to fire all of them You mean the traditional method.
SD70Dude Hire everyone who applies, and then have the weed weasels run around 24/7 trying to fire all of them
Hire everyone who applies, and then have the weed weasels run around 24/7 trying to fire all of them
You mean the traditional method.
I think what he means is you take your 500 candidates, carefully vet them and train them, then hire the 470-odd who didn't pass muster quickly.
Then have the weed weasels run around 24/7 equal-opportunity firing all of them.
SD70Dude BaltACD Transportation business KNOWS it will need 500 engineers in the next two years. Vetting of the applicants to the feeder system to generate the engineers in two years time gives you 100 acceptable individuals. You still will need 500 in two years. What do you do? The continuation of your business depends upon having the positions staffed! Hire everyone who applies, and then have the weed weasels run around 24/7 trying to fire all of them
The question is for the Master Vetter.
I already know how existing businesses will proceed.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
charlie hebdo1. The MMPI-A is dated, really. As I said, but apparently you didn't pay attention, I said the MMPI-2-RF or MMPI-3.
And the article actually said as much about the -A. The others you cited were also mentioned in the article, but didn't have a list like the -A did. I brought that simplified list (it also gave short descriptions of each factor) over as an example of what such a test would be looking for.
Clearly this is not a test that could be taken "off the shelf" and used tomorrow. Determining which factors are felt to be of importance would likely be the first step, followed by actual testing and comparing the results with real-world operations world to validate the assumptions.
I suspect that the experienced engineers would need a thorough education into the factors that are tested so they can assign importance to those factors.
One might wonder how many successful, experienced engineers might have a problem "passing" such a test.
Thanks for your input.
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...
tree68 charlie hebdo I previously mentioned several validated, heavily used tests examining personality and character traits, such as conscientiouness, judgement and caution. Other neuropsych tests could examine pertinent cognitive factors such as attention, impulsivity, memory and vigilance. Most of these could be completed in a relatively short time and some of the neuropsych tests could be repeated as a form of renewal in order to identify those of declining abilities. Indeed you have. A little on-line research brings up the MMPI-A (for adolescents, but they are likely similar) which was the only one that listed any specific characteristics. Seems easy enough - an hour or two answering multi-guess questions which results in conclusions for: Anxiety Obsessiveness Health Concerns Alienation Bizarre Mentation Anger Cynicism Conduct Problems Low Self-Esteem Low Aspirations Social Discomfort Family Problems School Problems Negative Treatment Indicators And there are validity scales: "Cannot Say" (Questions not answered) Lie Infrequency (Client "faking bad") Defensiveness Variable Response Inconsistency (Answering similar/opposite question pairs inconsistently) True Response Inconsistency (Answering questions all true/all false) Superlative Self-Presentation ("appearing excessively good") Psychopathology Infrequent Somatic Response An overly simplified review, to be sure. Now that we've tested, someone has to figure out what the right mix is for becoming an engineer. Who makes that call? Is there a pass/fail?
charlie hebdo I previously mentioned several validated, heavily used tests examining personality and character traits, such as conscientiouness, judgement and caution. Other neuropsych tests could examine pertinent cognitive factors such as attention, impulsivity, memory and vigilance. Most of these could be completed in a relatively short time and some of the neuropsych tests could be repeated as a form of renewal in order to identify those of declining abilities.
Indeed you have. A little on-line research brings up the MMPI-A (for adolescents, but they are likely similar) which was the only one that listed any specific characteristics. Seems easy enough - an hour or two answering multi-guess questions which results in conclusions for:
Anxiety
Obsessiveness
Health Concerns
Alienation
Bizarre Mentation
Anger
Cynicism
Conduct Problems
Low Self-Esteem
Low Aspirations
Social Discomfort
Family Problems
School Problems
Negative Treatment Indicators
And there are validity scales:
"Cannot Say" (Questions not answered)
Lie
Infrequency (Client "faking bad")
Defensiveness
Variable Response Inconsistency (Answering similar/opposite question pairs inconsistently)
True Response Inconsistency (Answering questions all true/all false)
Superlative Self-Presentation ("appearing excessively good")
Psychopathology
Infrequent Somatic Response
An overly simplified review, to be sure.
Now that we've tested, someone has to figure out what the right mix is for becoming an engineer. Who makes that call? Is there a pass/fail?
1. The MMPI-A is dated, really. As I said, but apparently you didn't pay attention, I said the MMPI-2-RF or MMPI-3.
2. To know what to look for requires a lot more training and experience as well as a doctorate and getting and maintaining a license. That's obviously a lot more than looking at a Wiki article.
3. Professional ethics does not permit sharing much information about specifics. Suffice it to say those would be determined by cooperative planning with experienced operating personnel (engineers) and some clerk from management.
4. There are clinical psychologists who primarily consult on these matters. There are normative comparison groups for law enforcement officers and other jobs, but not engineers. I screened out undesirable/unqualified folks in some positions at Fermi Lab years ago but this would probably best be handled by a team from U of Minnesota.
1. The MMPI-A is dated, really. As I said, but apparently you didn't pay attention, I said the MMPI-2-RF or MMMP-3.
tree68Still trying to figure out exactly what that is. Can you give us an example of a question or two you would ask the candidate?
Preferably candidates would be hired from within so there would be a 'history' to refer to. Pressure situations created to gauge reaction. Questions would take the form of 'what if'?
tree68Same question.
Same answer.
jeffhergert 243129 Lithonia Operator You need the best vetting, AND the best training and supervision. Then you need to add some luck. It starts with vetting. Step one which Amtrak fails miserably at. As I have stated ad nauseam, poor vetting, poor training, poor supervision. The RX for disaster. Who best to vet for a position than a panel of experienced veterans from that position? But who picks the panel? There are plenty of experienced veterans who probably shouldn't be on such a panel. Almost all the exCNW old heads are gone from my area. Most that I had the priviledge to work with were good rails. (There were a few, maybe not so much.) They 'grew up' so to speak learning the job and doing the work when micromanagment wasn't as much possible because you didn't have the instant reliable communication from almost anyplace you do today. Back when everyone knew what had to be done and how to do it. And they did the work to be done. To hear them tell of when they were new-hires, the old heads back then thought most were as useful as t..., well just let's say the old heads didn't think the new-hires would ever amount to anything close to a railroader. Jeff
243129 Lithonia Operator You need the best vetting, AND the best training and supervision. Then you need to add some luck. It starts with vetting. Step one which Amtrak fails miserably at. As I have stated ad nauseam, poor vetting, poor training, poor supervision. The RX for disaster. Who best to vet for a position than a panel of experienced veterans from that position?
Lithonia Operator You need the best vetting, AND the best training and supervision. Then you need to add some luck.
It starts with vetting. Step one which Amtrak fails miserably at. As I have stated ad nauseam, poor vetting, poor training, poor supervision. The RX for disaster.
Who best to vet for a position than a panel of experienced veterans from that position?
But who picks the panel? There are plenty of experienced veterans who probably shouldn't be on such a panel.
Almost all the exCNW old heads are gone from my area. Most that I had the priviledge to work with were good rails. (There were a few, maybe not so much.) They 'grew up' so to speak learning the job and doing the work when micromanagment wasn't as much possible because you didn't have the instant reliable communication from almost anyplace you do today. Back when everyone knew what had to be done and how to do it. And they did the work to be done.
To hear them tell of when they were new-hires, the old heads back then thought most were as useful as t..., well just let's say the old heads didn't think the new-hires would ever amount to anything close to a railroader.
From what I remember about the "old head CNW and Milwaukee guys is that blood alcohol content had alot to do with being in "the club".
The retirees plan ws usually to buy a tavern so all of the old rails could talk about the old days and get drunk and mean (often to me). They did know how to get the job done though, I learned alot.
243129Someone who possesses the acumen to be a locomotive engineer.
Still trying to figure out exactly what that is. Can you give us an example of a question or two you would ask the candidate?
243129Common sense.
Same question.
I missed a question you asked earlier - for my fire department, it comes down to how willing the individual is to put in the time and effort to be a part of the organization.
We also have a variety of things an individual can do, ranging from administrative to interior firefighter. and beyond (command, hazmat, etc). It's not all hauling hose and chopping down doors.
We have a committee that meets with applicants. They go over requirements, expectations, etc, and check references. The committee is made up of long-time members and relatively new members. This being a volunteer-based organization, sometimes the prospective members just can't commit the time.
Applicants also have to pass a simple background check through the Sheriff's office.
With good references and a positive interview, their name gets submitted to the floor. If someone there knows something the committee doesn't it will usually come out then.
If they want to get into interior firefighting, they must pass a physical as well as all the coursework involved.
Most career FD's have a physical agility test as part of their application process.
charlie hebdoI previously mentioned several validated, heavily used tests examining personality and character traits, such as conscientiouness, judgement and caution. Other neuropsych tests could examine pertinent cognitive factors such as attention, impulsivity, memory and vigilance. Most of these could be completed in a relatively short time and some of the neuropsych tests could be repeated as a form of renewal in order to identify those of declining abilities.
BaltACD 243129 would not pass his own vetting. Demonstrated abiltity not to learn.
243129 would not pass his own vetting. Demonstrated abiltity not to learn.
How did you determine that? Were you formerly an experienced engineer on the NEC? Are you trained in evaluating the cognitive abilities in learning?
tree68 charlie hebdo Joe, as a highly experienced Amtrak engineer would know what sort of questions should be asked or situations the candidate should be grilled on. A psychologist skilled in the use and interpretation of the instruments (or others) I mentioned would handle the character issues. Which are? Does the fact that I have to take a shopping list with me to the grocery store mean I can't retain important details? Does the fact that I can't solve some puzzle in under a minute mean I suck at problem solving? Who certifies that the tests are valid and applicable?
charlie hebdo Joe, as a highly experienced Amtrak engineer would know what sort of questions should be asked or situations the candidate should be grilled on. A psychologist skilled in the use and interpretation of the instruments (or others) I mentioned would handle the character issues.
Joe, as a highly experienced Amtrak engineer would know what sort of questions should be asked or situations the candidate should be grilled on. A psychologist skilled in the use and interpretation of the instruments (or others) I mentioned would handle the character issues.
Which are?
Does the fact that I have to take a shopping list with me to the grocery store mean I can't retain important details?
Does the fact that I can't solve some puzzle in under a minute mean I suck at problem solving?
Who certifies that the tests are valid and applicable?
I previously mentioned several validated, heavily used tests examining personality and character traits, such as conscientiouness, judgement and caution. Other neuropsych tests could examine pertinent cognitive factors such as attention, impulsivity, memory and vigilance. Most of these could be completed in a relatively short time and some of the neuropsych tests could be repeated as a form of renewal in order to identify those of declining abilities.
jeffhergertBut who picks the panel?
The union and the company.
jeffhergert To hear them tell of when they were new-hires, the old heads back then thought most were as useful as t..., well just let's say the old heads didn't think the new-hires would ever amount to anything close to a railroader. Jeff
No 'Old Head' has ever thought a new hire was worth two s..ts. The Older Heads thought the same things of the Old Heads.
tree68So, what should Amtrak be looking for as they vet their potential employees/promotees?
Someone who possesses the acumen to be a locomotive engineer.
tree68You state repeatedly "poor vetting, poor vetting, poor vetting." What, specifically, is good vetting? Or is it simply something which "you know it when you see it?"
The answer is contained in this thread. Had you read it you would not have asked this and many other of your questions.
tree68You've also stated that the engineer in question wouldn't have passed muster. What qualities (or lack thereof) would he have displayed four years ago when he was promoted to engineer that would have disqualified him?
Common sense.
243129Who best to vet for a position than a panel of experienced veterans from that position?
So, what should Amtrak be looking for as they vet their potential employees/promotees?
You state repeatedly "poor vetting, poor vetting, poor vetting." What, specifically, is good vetting? Or is it simply something which "you know it when you see it?"
You've also stated that the engineer in question wouldn't have passed muster. What qualities (or lack thereof) would he have displayed four years ago when he was promoted to engineer that would have disqualified him?
When you choose to be sarcastic, denigrate or criticize others you should have your 'ducks in a row'.
Lithonia OperatorYou need the best vetting, AND the best training and supervision. Then you need to add some luck.
I say this and given the opportunity I can prove it. There are engineers and conductors actively working on Amtrak's NEC that are a danger to the traveling public. They are poorly vetted, trained and supervised. They and Amtrak are an accident waiting to happen. I am not alone in this opinion.
I can prove it but Amtrak will not allow me to.
I tend to agree with Larry. I find it hard to believe that some vetting process can be that predictive.
To me the idea that some testing can find out if a person has the "right stuff" or not is a stretch. Humans are not that binary. And even if (according to some testing) someone is deemed to have the right stuff, will they still have it years later?
If you want guaranteed Right Stuff, you might as well watch old Tom Cruise movies; that whole concept seems Hollywood-ish to me.
You need the best vetting, AND the best training and supervision. Then you need to add some luck.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.