• CSX Acquisition of Pan Am Railways

  • Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.
Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.

Moderator: MEC407

  by QB 52.32
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 7:11 am You have as good as implied that the PAS, or at least the B&M though Hoosac Tunnel, is now just a Short Line handling what traffic they have from on-line industries to a Class I, Chessie or Topper, interchange.
With ~1/4 - 1/3 of PAS' current carload (non-intermodal, auto, unit train) traffic overhead through the Hoosac Tunnel, providing physical connection between the Class 1's or another carrier, within an area railroad network that has been disaggregated to individual short lines and regionals over time with some added complication within the relationships, including deregulated-era haulage rights added to conventional trackage rights and interline or junction settlement, and how the acquisition deal has been structured with additional rights. open-gateway conditions, and neutral management in the light of strategic possibilities, my take is that it's just too soon to dismiss a continuing overhead role moving forward.
  by johnpbarlow
 
A CSX/Springfield Terminal agreement employee who is a long time member of International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers {IFPTE ), Local 202 has filed a letter with the STB as of 5/30/23 stating that CSX/G&W management team may not be observing NY Dock Labor protection wrt IFPTE personnel as was promised in the CSX acquisition of Pan Am and formation of B&E to operate PAS. Here are a few excerpts:
I attended three mediation sessions/conference calls with IFPTE managers, CSX, G&W and unknown carrier's hired private legal offices, in my opinion, it appears that labor protection in not the carrier's objective concerning STB Docket No. FD 36472. From my direct witnessing of a few mediation sessions, representative participation was an assemblage of the parties without a clear concept and no logical guidance. On these calls there were multiple representatives from the Pittsburg and Shawmut Railroad, LLC and Berkshire and Eastern Railroad - CSX - and these multiple third parties consultants and attorneys only compounded the confusion. The primary focus from these discussions focused on one particular job function Construction/Inspector' which functionally represents only one of twelve Job titles and job descriptions, established through negotiations in the current IFPTE / STRC collective bargaining agreement. The job of Construction/Inspector is also well-established and greater defined in the railroads practice, procedures and construction manuals.

This observation appeared to be a surprise for the G&W Corporate Counsel and G&W VP Labor Relations as well as G&W Vice President of Operations and G&W Senior Vice President - Who each basically declined to offer any jobs to IFPTE members stating: "The {IFPTE Local 202} Job titles and job descriptions does not fit into the G&W, short line business plan." Also affirmed that CSX, with their TEAM is in the process coming up with a new proposal - BUT -they have reassured IFPTE that it's members will have a "JOB" - CSX stated position. That "a job meets or exceeds the provisions of New York Dock protection"?

Therefore, according to CSX, no one will be eligible for New York Dock protection.
Concurrently, CSX wants to independently move forward with IFPTE even though CSX will plans to only retain 48% of operating railroad in t he IFPTE Local 202 CBA. The remainder 48% CSX will operate and the 52% will be for G&W to operate. This will remove 52% ( Pan Am Southern) that the IFPTE, deriving location of work, income and quality of life as part of the operating railroad. The Springfield Terminal Railway Company with IFPTE Local 202 currently covers the whole system as per the collective bargaining agreement between IFPTE and STRC. The IFPTE Local 202 members will lose better than one half of our current collective bargaining agreement area of responsibility. This G&W proposal was followed by CSX proposal to eliminate 96% - of the jobs covered in the most recent collective bargaining agreement.
CSX has been recently caught multiple times in multiple locations performing work that is covered in the IFPTE Local 202 collective bargaining agreement.

In addition, CSX recently abolished all lFPTE Local 202 members headquarters on the 52% (Pan Am
Southern) and put bids with headquarters on the 48% (Pan Am Railway) according "for legal reasons".

In conclusion, IFPTE Local 202 members want to know where are we in this STB authorized process - our collective anxieties are at an all time high - rumors, misinformation further amplifies this perception and disorentation?
How serious is this complaint? For whatever reason, I thought the allocation of ST agreement personnel would be primarily an issue for engineers & conductors but obviously there are other functions impacted.

https://dcms-external.s3.amazonaws.com/ ... 306666.pdf
  by newpylong
 
Every other union craft that has an agreement with the ST has to be accounted for - not just T&E.

The filing is very nebulous. I am not sure if this employee is aware of what NY Dock Protection really entails.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Agree, Mr. Newpy, regarding this "adversely affected" employee's thoughts on New York Dock.

Where is it established that to keep his seniority, he must relocate? That's what NY Dock is largely about.

Now if he is adversely affected regarding his rate of pay, he could come under Washington Job, which I must acknowledge that maybe since I left the industry forty one years ago, is no longer in force.
  by newpylong
 
Also highly unorthodox for a collective bargaining individual to file with the STB vs the union giving its grievances on behalf of its members.
  by lordsigma12345
 
This probably has been previously discussed but is it clear what is going to be used for power? Is B&E/G&W getting use of some of the current Pan Am power as part of the deal to take over and operate Division 3?
  by johnpbarlow
 
Per the detailed CSX acquisition STB filing of 2 years ago (April 2021), B&E is (or was) to buy approximately 33 Pan AM locomotives (from the current PAR roster of 102 locomotives) from CSX. Presumably some if not all of these PAR locomotives will need to support I-ETMS and/or ACSES PTC given B&E will operate over segments where such PTC is needed.

Interestingly and perhaps unrelated is this recent joint G&W and Wabtec press release where G&W will acquire 69 certified pre-owned locomotives from Wabtec by December 2023 (35 Dash 9 and 34 Dash 8 locomotives). Here's an excerpt that is perhaps relevant to B&E in that CSOR and P&W locomotives that support ACSES PTC might end up on B&E (?):
The order of 35 Dash 9 and 34 Dash 8 locomotives will be deployed at the Buffalo & Pittsburgh Railroad; Chicago, Ft. Wayne & Eastern Railroad; Connecticut Southern Railroad; Indiana & Ohio Railway; New England Central Railroad and Providence and Worcester Railroad.
  by johnpbarlow
 
CSX has announced on its job postings site that on Thursday July 13, 2023, there will be a virtual career fair to facilitate remote interviews for hiring Springfield Terminal freight conductors for Waterville ME, Portland ME, and Lawrence MA.

The note "BE THE FIRST TO APPLY" seems ominous - is CSX really having difficulty finding freight conductor candidates for the ex-PAR territories?

Also, there's a $5K signing bonus for a person hired to be a Springfield Terminal Assistant Signalman at Billerica if that person is still on-board after one year.

https://fa-eowa-saasfaprod1.fa.ocs.orac ... e=location
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
  by newpylong
 
From what I have heard, they are barely able to operate the railroad (the ST on both ex-PAR and PAS) currently due to labor shortages.
  by MEC407
 
Unemployment in Maine is only 2.3%, compared to the national average of 3.7%. They need to get serious if they want to fill those Portland conductor positions: a starting pay of $23.42 an hour is not going to attract many people in this area for a grueling job that requires being on-call 24/7 and primarily working nights/weekends/holidays, considering that you can make more money than that by waiting tables in restaurants and do it on a schedule that allows you to have a life.

They're also competing with Amtrak for workers. Amtrak was recently hiring conductors and assistant conductors for the Downeaster. A much friendlier schedule and work environment. They, and Keolis, attracted several former ST employees.
  by atholrail
 
I know in Deerfield ED4 and ED6 have been abolished due to crew shortages.

PL1 now works out of Deerfield on Wednesdays. Possibly more days as well.

Hardly any power anymore due to no EDPO/POED bringing in power from point east. Some days not enough power for EDSP and EDBF both so they only run one. Both of those crews get tossed all over now.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
A rather disturbing report has been posted over at the CPKC Forum:

https://www.railroad.net/post1625810.html#p1625810

This report notes that CPKC was expecting to handle 2000 Containers per week from Saint John. The actual volume has been about one third of that and noted that "Ex-Im" business is declining.

Now one must wonder if Chessie is having second thoughts about pouring all that Fancy Feast into acquiring that broken down road. Does she foresee that as she fixes up the Maine Central resulting in a competitive route beyond ratemaking, that more vessels will choose to call at Saint John resulting in enough traffic to make both "that Beaver" and herself happy.

Of course, any additional traffic such as warehousing (Wally World, Amazon, et al) and "Products of Forests" she is able to develop within Maine by having a road able to handle such is simply gravy?
  by CN9634
 
Doubt it… they’re a long way from pulling containers or any traffic out of Saint John in any meaningful way. Give it time, global markets are finicky
  by artman
 
johnpbarlow wrote: Mon Jul 10, 2023 6:26 am CSX has announced on its job postings site that on Thursday July 13, 2023, there will be a virtual career fair to facilitate remote interviews for hiring Springfield Terminal freight conductors for Waterville ME, Portland ME, and Lawrence MA.

The note "BE THE FIRST TO APPLY" seems ominous - is CSX really having difficulty finding freight conductor candidates for the ex-PAR territories?
One friend just left CSX last week for G&W. He is one of more than a few, according to him. When I talked to him last summer about pending purchase of PAR, he mentioned how much he did not want to work for CSX given their scheduling and monitoring. Guess he found his way out.
  by newpylong
 
CSX is going to have a real hard time retaining and hiring until the ST goes away.
  • 1
  • 289
  • 290
  • 291
  • 292
  • 293
  • 313