I KNOW WHAT I AM DOING!!!

Have you heard this one? There was a new guy who was working out of Tilford yard in Atlanta the other day when they needed to set out one flat lumber car that was loaded-it had bad brakes on it. Well he moved the flat car over to a track that the yard master had given him and he was about to pull out when a car inspector walked up and was making small talk and trying to help the guy out. The car inspector suggested that he leave another car with the bad one and the new guy cut him off quickly and said "HEY BUDDIE, I KNOW WHAT I AM DOING-I JUST GOT OUT OF THAT CONDUCTORS SCHOOL LAST MONTH-so the car inspector did not bother the man anymore. The young conductor pulled his cut out of that track and went and put his train back together. About 15 minutes later that Heavy loaded lumber car rolled out and traveled about 1/2 mile and got up to around 15 mph and finally coupled up to a engine sitting still. IT HIT SO HARD THAT THE FLOOR IN THE SD-70 BUCKLED-I smell a big payday for those guys.

Maybe if junior wasn't such a smartass to the car knocker he could get him to cover with a faulty brake story. Live and learn, I suppose.

LMAO, its not funny, bu thats pretty good. Even a myself who has read plenty of Old CR manuels in his time, knows to set an extra car with one with a bad brake. But, what kind of car did the inspector want left with the lumber car? Also, are there any pics?

That's true that he should have left any other car with a good hand-brake attached to the loaded lumber flat. Dumba$$. I bet ya this know-it-all conductor didn't know enough to get out of service insurance when he marked-up. Just glad nobody got hurt on that engine.

There's a moral here, and no one has yet picked up on it.

If this had happened on Conrail, when Conrail was Conrail...first, the noob wouln't have BEEN to Conductor School until he'd had 180 starts as a "brakeman." Conrail kept a limited number of those jobs on the boards for new hires.

Second...if he'd shot his mouth off like that, there would have been some old-head who was used to imparting wisdom at the point of a fist...and Junior would have finished the day with an ice pack. And that SD-70 crew would have been left b!tching about their pay, just another day.

CSX doesn't BELIEVE in the wisdom of the old heads. They don't believe the old guys have anything to offer...if it doesn't come out of a book or spits out of a printer, it's not worth knowing. They seem to get a perverse pleasure picking on the old guys, and SEVERLY punish people when violence, force or agressiveness (even in speech) is used to communicate.

Communicate ANYTHING, including warning or instruction.

One thing I found when my corner of Conrail was melded into CSX was...there were danged FEW old heads around, and the ones that were, were cowed and quied and passive-agressive. They would have taken private amusement in this accident.

I admit I do myself. Because it speaks VOLUMES about how CSX is failing in recruitment/training/supervision; and how p!ssing EVERYONE off just makes people want to let the idiots come to their natural ends.

If the car inspector had some idea that the lumber car would/could roll, he had an obligation to say something to someone else, be it the yardmaster, engineer or dispatcher, or some other. That runaway car could have easilly killed someone. At least it was only property damage and the carman can keep a clear conscience, but he bears some (small) responsibility for allowing a knowingly dangerous situation to continue.

JBlaisdell wrote:If the car inspector had some idea that the lumber car would/could roll, he had an obligation to say something to someone else, be it the yardmaster, engineer or dispatcher, or some other. That runaway car could have easilly killed someone. At least it was only property damage and the carman can keep a clear conscience, but he bears some (small) responsibility for allowing a knowingly dangerous situation to continue.

I disagree! The carman made a suggestion, but if the new guy doesn't heed his wisdom or advice, then "to hell with him"!! The carman is NOT at fault!!!!

Two newbies an engineer and conductor which both stayed in the yard avoiding mainline service their entire short lived carreers recently were called to work an industry switcher. On the way back to the yard coming down the mainline on light locomotives they stopped at a dwarf signal that was red, the newbie conductor told the engineer the correct use of that signal and it's function them told him it didn't pertain to their movement and they proceeded on to the next dwarf signal on the mainline which was also red, the newbie conductor once more gave the correct use of the signal and they proceeded by the red signal. I gave them an 'A' for effort, but they flunked out on application. The newbie engineer is currently serving 6 months in the street and the newbie conductor resigned. CSX is to blame, but the policy will continue.

Engineer James wrote:Yeah, the carman, is not at fault.

I agree with this, after-all the car-knocker did what CSXT expects us to do, Mentor other employees with less time on the railroad.

Engineer James wrote:That Switchman should be fired.

I tend to disagree with you here, especially since this is the CSXT way (make a mistake and be gone). Yes, this was a very serious mistake that could have killed many people, but fortunately it didn't. Perhaps they need to take him out of service and maybe he'll lose some of the know-it-all attitude. Engineer James, how would you like it if you screwed-up and people judged your actions and so easily suggested that you be fired. Maybe if he is disciplined and reviews the rules, which clearly state that a car set-out with a defective brake system and/or hand-brake be left with another car with a working brake, he will mentor others in the future if he sees them about to do what he did.


As for the engineer that Coen refers to, sounds like he didn't know his signals and shouldn't be out there just yet. I'm not trying to judge this person, but if people don't know their signals, we are all at risk.

CSX Conductor> Well, first of all, for referance here I'm only 17, but still common sence would tell me if I were the TM to maybe send him back for maybe some more training, however its only a 5 week course (for CSXT). But, even then, I probably would maybe have thought SERIOUSLY about letting him go. I mean how long has this switchman been on the rails? And, what happens if he doesn't take the advise or even the training and forgets again, gets smart, and this time it is a full 20 car train barreling down on a small 2-3 car local, coming toward it.....

To me it would be risky. And, yes my actions are always comprehended and I am told i should be fired..... but thats High School for ya.

I have very little knowledge of train crew operations, and the complexities of the union and hierarchical structure of crews.

However, in many other transportation industries, team management is the mantra - anyone can say anything about any issue affecting the operations, and everyone has an obligation to correct unsafe or incorrect practices.

In fact, there was a great NOVA episode on the 'worst plane crash ever' just recently that highlighted the importance of this concept <wgbh>.

The posts on this topic seem to indicate that team management is not a part of train operations....is this true?

One of the largest stumbling blocks to a culture of team management is breaking down the barriers of rank....

As a former Naval officer and former Merchant Marine officer, I have been through many 'team management' courses, simulations, exercises, and classes. In my own experience, it works. Everyone - from Admirals to Captains to Junior officers, is now trained never to dismiss the comments or perspective of anyone. This has limits of course, and the military hasn't abandoned a command authority structure.

Comments?

Dave

CSX Conductor, I agree that engineer should have been more aware of signals and there meaning seeing he had to have at least 3 1/2 to 4 years on the railroad compared to the conductor that had less than a year. We see this migration of new hires that once an opening becomes available in the yard they stay put whatever little training they had is gone. When their forced in to engine service they are lost and it makes our job twice as difficult to train them. This particular conductor I had on one of his first trips on the mainline after being promoted and I use that word lightly. I explained that he needed to bounce from road to yard to stay qualified that yard service was great your home sometime everyday, but sooner or later you'll have to get on the mainline. He didn't listen and stuff happens. The engineer was off another division and even though he probably ran some trains out of this yard he wasn't qualified on that particular mainline that in itself should of disqualified him from working that job and it's most likely the reason he didn't get fired, even though that doesn't excuse his ignorance of signals.

Engineer James wrote:CSX Conductor> Well, first of all, for referance here I'm only 17, but still common sence would tell me if I were the TM to maybe send him back for maybe some more training, however its only a 5 week course (for CSXT). But, even then, I probably would maybe have thought SERIOUSLY about letting him go. I mean how long has this switchman been on the rails? And, what happens if he doesn't take the advise or even the training and forgets again, gets smart, and this time it is a full 20 car train barreling down on a small 2-3 car local, coming toward it.....

To me it would be risky. And, yes my actions are always comprehended and I am told i should be fired..... but thats High School for ya.

It's not a 5 week course your information is wrong that $6000 schooling doesn't count. Once hired there is two phases new hires go through for on the job training 1) as a trainmen qualifying which is around 8 weeks 2) conductor qualifying which is around 10 weeks. At times the railroads extend their training if they need more. It's still not enough training, years ago it took up to 3 years to be offered promotion to conductor. I place the blame on the railroads and not the employee. The railroad places this false sense of security that these new hires are the best the most trained employees they've ever had, hence the arogant attitude of "I know what I'm doing".

(was the trainman in question, known as "melodic 777"? ) "engineer james", tread very, very lightly,ound the edge of the slippery slope, you have placed yourself on. You have exactlly ZERO amount of experience, and are unqualified, to make ANY judgements, against anybody, working any job, anywhere. Your assumption, of what's right, and wrong, with someone doing their job on the railroad, is what makes other "junior wanna-be's" look bad. You certainly are welcome to your opinion, regarding what you imagine, might have happened, but you might want to be quiet, with those opinions. You will make ZERO allies, on the job, or around the railroad, with an attitude like that. Right or wrong, what has happened, is between him, the carrier, and his delegated representative. Until you have worked the job, yourself, you are not qualified to make a judgement, about any aspect of the events that have taken place, and how the rules may, or may not have been, applied. A person who receives his training in a classroom, and not in the field, under months of OJT, with experienced, safe and motivated teachers, will not have the ability, to know the right and wrong, of every action. Insecurity, and lack of knowledge, might sometimes be countered, with a display of "false bravado", by someone not eager to look like, or be thought of as, a novice. Not a good place to be, when someone is trying to bluff his way through the work, if you are sharing the yard, with him. Certainly not reason to be fired, but definately cause for some serious mentoring, and/or some intensified safety awareness training. Let's hold off on the lynch mob, and see if he does better, with some help, no? Regards

If this story is true, then the FO he was working under will be the one to hang. If he was only out of school for one month then he is obviously a TT and the FO should have been by his side or at least within site. These oldheads are not suppose to use the new guys as brakeman or switchman! The trainee was not being properly supervised! Everytime you accept that 12.00 bucks to have a trainee attached to your hip you better keep an eye on him or it could be your asss!