Backshop charlie hebdo Unions do more than raise pay scales. They also concern themselves with work conditions and safety. Perhaps that is what is missing here? Correct. I like how anti-union people say "that doesn't matter because we have OSHA" while totally ignoring that if there wasn't an organized watchdog group paying attention, industry would have their lobbyists working on repealing and watering down standards in a minute.
charlie hebdo Unions do more than raise pay scales. They also concern themselves with work conditions and safety. Perhaps that is what is missing here?
Unions do more than raise pay scales. They also concern themselves with work conditions and safety. Perhaps that is what is missing here?
Correct. I like how anti-union people say "that doesn't matter because we have OSHA" while totally ignoring that if there wasn't an organized watchdog group paying attention, industry would have their lobbyists working on repealing and watering down standards in a minute.
It's especially bad since in many regulatory and other departments, the upper echelon comes from the industries they are supposed to regulate!
charlie hebdo Backshop charlie hebdo Unions do more than raise pay scales. They also concern themselves with work conditions and safety. Perhaps that is what is missing here? Correct. I like how anti-union people say "that doesn't matter because we have OSHA" while totally ignoring that if there wasn't an organized watchdog group paying attention, industry would have their lobbyists working on repealing and watering down standards in a minute. It's especially bad since in many regulatory and other departments, the upper echelon comes from the industries they are supposed to regulate!
A Union contract is a AGREEMENT between the company and the union with both parties agreeing to WRITTEN work rules and pay rates.
How many of us, in dealing with our work superiors have sought out a rasie for the work we have done, that in OUR minds are above and beyond the requirements of the job we hold - and we get the sob story about how the company can't afford such a raise or some other means of declining the request that both parties know is pure BS - BUT there is no written agreement to be enforced.
Unions are a method to enforce written agreements. Governmnent regulatory agencies don't enforce Union contracts.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
charlie hebdoIt's especially bad since in many regulatory and other departments, the upper echelon comes from the industries they are supposed to regulate!
A mixed blessing - we've seen what happens when people with little or no knowledge of the railroad industry are placed in positions of authority - be it management or regulatory.
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...
The fox guarding the henhouse? Hopefully not!
BaltACD Unions are a method to enforce written agreements. Governmnent regulatory agencies don't enforce Union contracts.
Correct.
I think what Larry refers to is when someone with no experience in railroads is placed in charge of an agency like the FRA. People should have at least some expertise/ experience in the industry they are charged with regulating.
deleted
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
There is a difference between having a former corporate guy now regulating his former corporate colleagues and an actual worker doing so. For example, an EHH-type as head of FRA or DOT, as opposed to a former dispatcher or engineer.
charlie hebdoFor example, an EHH-type as head of FRA or DOT, as opposed to a former dispatcher or engineer.
Meanwhile, what about the opposite case, where someone with less than no relevant experience is put in charge -- Sarah Feinberg, for example? She seems to have done reasonably well, whereas Bella was just a disaster.
I think it depends on the character of the original, more than the nominal office to which they rose or exploited. And by extension to the morals or motivation of whoever political put them in that position.
My impression of EHH was not someone interested in scheming. Exploitive as a serial business 'leader', yes he was. Caring for employees, no he wasn't. But not in the 'business' of gaming the government to give his cronies opportunities they want. I'd point a finger much quicker at whoever it was at EPA that sanctioned the torpedoing of EMD's compliance with Tier 4 final "NOx" emissions.
Agreed. But on the whole, I would prefer actual workers in the industry given oversight than corporate types, especially the MBA guys, who can manage finance today, a railroad tomorrow, because they are usually really working for Wall Street.
charlie hebdoBut on the whole, I would prefer actual workers in the industry given oversight than corporate types...
Note that this is a very separate thing from those people Bill Sword so despised, recent grads from the Leland Stanford Junior University business program who think they know more than anyone around them, but often prove to know far less even than common sense through the ranks would have given.
... especially the MBA guys, who can manage finance today, a railroad tomorrow, because they are usually really working for Wall Street.
The model I used for 'good conglomerate management' was the way the various Thermo companies did business, right up until the tech bottom at the beginning of the century. Everything those guys acquired, they ran well, and they then leveraged the assets and services of one good company to support the others.
In the 'old days' Richard Branson understood when to combine his staffs, and when to keep them functionally separate, business by business. That hasn't been true for some years, and the collapse of his 'empire' can, I think, be attributed to that.
Yes, much of general management can be "common", and yes, a great deal more of effective administration can be. But it will never replace knowledge about the industry concerned and the people who should be in it. (And sometimes the people who shouldn't... )
Overmod charlie hebdo But on the whole, I would prefer actual workers in the industry given oversight than corporate types... Remember the advice I gave Joe, about having Amtrak training overseen by a cadre of people with hard running experience on high-speed trains? It's that same thing. Just as you want to be taught by someone who's done it, you want to know that you're being disciplined by someone who understands what's important -- and that your railroad is being run by people who comprehend how to operate things right, not in ways that make the wrong kind of money from nominal ownership. Note that this is a very separate thing from those people Bill Sword so despised, recent grads from the Leland Stanford Junior University business program who think they know more than anyone around them, but often prove to know far less even than common sense through the ranks would have given. ... especially the MBA guys, who can manage finance today, a railroad tomorrow, because they are usually really working for Wall Street. This is largely an unfortunate consequence from the go-go Sixties, where conglomerates became all the rage and 'general management science' was increasingly assumed to be both an applicable and a teachable 'skill' (to be honest, it was qualified in school by noting that you 'hired experts and then listened to them' in all the areas you weren't truly qualified ... but very few people in my experience listened to that when killings were to be made or 'chainsaw Al' tactics essayed. The situation got worse in the era of Saul Steinberg and Reliance, and of course blew itself up in the Eighties ... there have been attempts since then to reward 'doing it right' but they usually get torpedoed sooner or later as the engineered recessions and market crashes progress year after year. The model I used for 'good conglomerate management' was the way the various Thermo companies did business, right up until the tech bottom at the beginning of the century. Everything those guys acquired, they ran well, and they then leveraged the assets and services of one good company to support the others. In the 'old days' Richard Branson understood when to combine his staffs, and when to keep them functionally separate, business by business. That hasn't been true for some years, and the collapse of his 'empire' can, I think, be attributed to that. Yes, much of general management can be "common", and yes, a great deal more of effective administration can be. But it will never replace knowledge about the industry concerned and the people who should be in it. (And sometimes the people who shouldn't... )
charlie hebdo But on the whole, I would prefer actual workers in the industry given oversight than corporate types...
Remember the advice I gave Joe, about having Amtrak training overseen by a cadre of people with hard running experience on high-speed trains? It's that same thing. Just as you want to be taught by someone who's done it, you want to know that you're being disciplined by someone who understands what's important -- and that your railroad is being run by people who comprehend how to operate things right, not in ways that make the wrong kind of money from nominal ownership.
This is largely an unfortunate consequence from the go-go Sixties, where conglomerates became all the rage and 'general management science' was increasingly assumed to be both an applicable and a teachable 'skill' (to be honest, it was qualified in school by noting that you 'hired experts and then listened to them' in all the areas you weren't truly qualified ... but very few people in my experience listened to that when killings were to be made or 'chainsaw Al' tactics essayed. The situation got worse in the era of Saul Steinberg and Reliance, and of course blew itself up in the Eighties ... there have been attempts since then to reward 'doing it right' but they usually get torpedoed sooner or later as the engineered recessions and market crashes progress year after year.
?????
adkrr64 I think what Larry refers to is when someone with no experience in railroads is placed in charge of an agency like the FRA. People should have at least some expertise/ experience in the industry they are charged with regulating.
Many in the ranks think the FRA is currently just a lap dog for the carriers. That FRA stands for Friend of Railroad Administrations. Mainly because they (FRA) have been quick to hand out railroad requested waivers to the carriers during crises (local and national) the last few years while declining or ignoring requests from the unions.
Interestingly, I know of no waiver for hours of service for the pandemic. That's the first one I would've expected the carriers' to have requested.
Jeff
To: Jeff H.: Here is an "Official" FMCSA link that may provide you, and anyone else who might be interested, in the H.O.S. currently in place[As of June 1,2020
"...HOS Final Rule On June 1, 2020, FMCSA revised four provisions of the hours of service regulations to provide greater flexibility for drivers without adversely affecting safety. Motor carriers are required to comply with the new HOS regulations starting on September 29, 2020.
Linked @ https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/hours-of-service
It seems a little surprising that there was no mention of a 'change' rule for the Railroad Industry, as well. My guess. would be that the railroads maid no effert to lobby for such a change; as it would effect the same 'relief' sought by Trucking interests during the current Pandemic/COVID 19 ?
jeffhergert adkrr64 I think what Larry refers to is when someone with no experience in railroads is placed in charge of an agency like the FRA. People should have at least some expertise/ experience in the industry they are charged with regulating. Many in the ranks think the FRA is currently just a lap dog for the carriers. That FRA stands for Friend of Railroad Administrations. Mainly because they (FRA) have been quick to hand out railroad requested waivers to the carriers during crises (local and national) the last few years while declining or ignoring requests from the unions. Interestingly, I know of no waiver for hours of service for the pandemic. That's the first one I would've expected the carriers' to have requested. Jeff
That shouldn't come as a surprise these past four years.
charlie hebdoThat shouldn't come as a surprise these past four years.
Whether or not the FRA and AAR are somehow nearly incestuously involved is another matter. They certainly did not, and to my knowledge never have, seen particularly eye to eye on matters of safety enforcement ... which is technically the only major 'remit' the FRA has in the game. If you're going to find evidence of some kind of organized collusion (politically-steered or otherwise) I think you're going to have to go into detail with personal liaison between FRA and AAR staff, and build back from there.
Far more troublesome, to me, are political appointees with actual day-to-day responsibility, especially in making what they consider 'policy'. This for example was what Bella did as a NTSB commissioner: everything had some 'Carthago delenda est' spin about how positive train control would have made it better, regardless of any technical merit whatsoever to the claim. I won't say I'd prefer unenlightened greed to doctrinaire Procrustean politicking ... perhaps better to say I loathe them both and would go to great lengths to see them eliminated as a factor in either agency action or decision-making.
I'm interested to see where a Biden administration goes with FRA, and who they find to set various priorities. particularly if substantial Federal money gets allocated to railroad development. The Christian-Scientist-with-appendicitis problem I currently have is that I can't imagine much positive ever coming out of a Department of Transportation headed by Rahm Emanuel ... unless someone knows about distinctive competence in railroad operations I've never seen a shred of practical evidence of.
OvermodIn my experience FRA is a bureaucracy, and it doesn't really matter that much who's at the 'top' of it.
Deleted. Not worth it.
zugmann Overmod In my experience FRA is a bureaucracy, and it doesn't really matter that much who's at the 'top' of it.
Overmod In my experience FRA is a bureaucracy, and it doesn't really matter that much who's at the 'top' of it.
You knwo what? Screw it. I'm not getting involved in a Overmod peeing match today. The thread is yours.
zugmann I'm not getting involved in a Overmod peeing match today.
Whatever makes you feel better. All yours... have at it. I'm not getting involved with your stuff anymore. You win.
Overmod zugmann Overmod In my experience FRA is a bureaucracy, and it doesn't really matter that much who's at the 'top' of it. Cute, especially since you have not a shred of an idea what my experience with FRA is
zugmann
Everyone has the right to criticize you and/or anyone else for whatever purpose they desire to spout. This is a internet forum.
BaltACDEveryone has the right to criticize you and/or anyone else for whatever purpose they desire to spout.
What he doesn't 'get to do' rhetorically is criticize my opinion just because he disagrees with it, without indicating any facts or reasons to do so. (Even so, he has a constitutional right to do that, as a few people are finding out on RyPN in the past few hours ... it just doesn't advance anything in any meaningful sense except to score troll points.)
Not that it matters, really, on an Internet forum.
OvermodWhat he doesn't 'get to do' rhetorically is criticize my opinion just because he disagrees with it, without indicating any facts or reasons to do so. (Even so, he has a constitutional right to do that, as a few people are finding out on RyPN in the past few hours ... it just doesn't advance anything in any meaningful sense except to score troll points.)
Don't involve me with that dumpster fire that is RYPN lately.
I already conceded to you. Don't bother bringing up my name. I'm done discussing anythign with you. Fair enough? Well, besides this message that is discussing something with you - but you get the point.
zugmannI'm done discussing anything with you.
So what is your background with the FRA? You implied that you had one.
Overmod charlie hebdo That shouldn't come as a surprise these past four years. In my experience FRA is a bureaucracy, and it doesn't really matter that much who's at the 'top' of it. The line and staff will happily tell you 'I was here when they arrived, and I'll be here after they leave'. Meaningful change in how that bureaucracy does business requires far more action than the Trump people would be able to bring to bear, and I doubt you'll see much lasting evidence they did other than window dressing or the occasional 'tweet' opportunity. Whether or not the FRA and AAR are somehow nearly incestuously involved is another matter. They certainly did not, and to my knowledge never have, seen particularly eye to eye on matters of safety enforcement ... which is technically the only major 'remit' the FRA has in the game. If you're going to find evidence of some kind of organized collusion (politically-steered or otherwise) I think you're going to have to go into detail with personal liaison between FRA and AAR staff, and build back from there. Far more troublesome, to me, are political appointees with actual day-to-day responsibility, especially in making what they consider 'policy'. This for example was what Bella did as a NTSB commissioner: everything had some 'Carthago delenda est' spin about how positive train control would have made it better, regardless of any technical merit whatsoever to the claim. I won't say I'd prefer unenlightened greed to doctrinaire Procrustean politicking ... perhaps better to say I loathe them both and would go to great lengths to see them eliminated as a factor in either agency action or decision-making. I'm interested to see where a Biden administration goes with FRA, and who they find to set various priorities. particularly if substantial Federal money gets allocated to railroad development. The Christian-Scientist-with-appendicitis problem I currently have is that I can't imagine much positive ever coming out of a Department of Transportation headed by Rahm Emanuel ... unless someone knows about distinctive competence in railroad operations I've never seen a shred of practical evidence of.
charlie hebdo That shouldn't come as a surprise these past four years.
In my experience FRA is a bureaucracy, and it doesn't really matter that much who's at the 'top' of it. The line and staff will happily tell you 'I was here when they arrived, and I'll be here after they leave'. Meaningful change in how that bureaucracy does business requires far more action than the Trump people would be able to bring to bear, and I doubt you'll see much lasting evidence they did other than window dressing or the occasional 'tweet' opportunity.
And what precisely is your experience with the FRA? In what capacity?
As to Rahm Emanuel as Sec of Transportation: it's hardly a done deal. Whatever one thinks of him, he does get stuff done. But I suppose you have some experience with him as well?
And what is your "distinctive competence in railroad operations"?
OM: "You can have your own opinion all day long. You don't have the standing to criticize mine, let alone any right."
Anyone has the right to criticize you or anyone else on here, regardless of their "standing." What makes you so special? What is your standing? Nobody actually knows.
And what is your remark involving RyPN supposed to mean? A warning?
charlie hebdoAnd what is your remark involving RyPN supposed to mean? A warning?
It has nothing whatsoever to do with Zug or anything he posts -- and I don't want to even suggest that it does. (Now, I don't remember it always being that way, but I was specifically asked to join RyPN circa 2011 to address a previous evolving dumpster fire of poor 'manners', and of course there is a piece of famous history I won't go into from circa 2006 when one poster started saying he was going to sue the whole Internet presence associated with Eleanor-P for slander or libel, and huge numbers of people believed him.
We've had occasional bouts of 'trouble' along the vague general attitude line here from time to time, a recent one being a post that seemed to be mocking Mark Meyer, but Mark chose not to respond in kind and the thing seems to have blown over. As things here usually do.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.