Staggers Act - A Revisit

Right again John from Jersey. The staffing problem, as I've mentioned has multiple issues. Over the years prior to PSR many railroads had bee going towards schemes where there was more predictability for crews. In my time at BNSF they had a scheme where the engineers were on call for four days, but then had a couple for off days. Other methods were tried, such as half of the on call guys being subject to call in the daytime, and the other half at night. All of these have been thrown out the window. Boards were cut to the bone, and strict attendance policies have been implemented.

In the past there have been slack times where guys have gotten cur, and others where we were short. The present shortage seems to have been ongoing since PSR was installed. A friend who is a general chairman retorted how a crew shortage of 8 years in not an emergency. He's right! They have hired countless guys over the last several years. Few last. Why would they? Officials are often trying to write them up over petty errors, most of which have no safety implications. They don't have a competitive pay scale anymore either. Lots of the guys who pinned themselves ahead were smart and good workers. One guy was fairly new. The managers started picking at him over mostly trivial points. This kid was a good railroader. Every time that I worked with him he had his books open, in an effort to become more proficient. He finally had enough and went into heavy equipment. That likely puts him on par pay wise, but no more 24/7, no more A-hole Trainmaster....

JayBee wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 3:31 pm I have put this in discussions in other forums, but I think people need to understand the implications of demographics in this discussion. First the US working age population has been shrinking since 2007. It started slowly but is now accelerating. The working age (18 - 65) population this year is 400,000 fewer workers than there were last year.

Yes and no... I'd say the "working age" definition has been redefined quite a bit -- that started when 401K's imploded in 2008, but continues today given advances in overall health and attitudes towards older workers. Social Security has pushed the age for full benefits up to 67 for those born after 1960, so I won't be surprised if that turns to 69 for those born after 1990.

JayBe wrote: The point of this is that the railroads are going to have to compete very hard for workers in a shrinking workforce. Higher pay and better working conditions may help, but it might not be enough.

Perhaps it's time to revisit attitudes towards encouraging people to consider trade education vs. entering into loand with six figure debt to get a degree in French Women's Poetry (and a minor in Native American Gender Studies) which don't guarantee any form of meaningful employment that can pay those loans back...

In that light, the railroad's a great place to work. So is being an iron worker or an electrician. You'll have to punch your ticket doing crap jobs for a couple years, but long term it's not such a bad gig.

Engineer Spike, PSR has been pretty disastrous for railroads. I'm not sure how many of the Class I's stick with it, because it's pretty obvious PSR is slowly wearing down and burning RR's that use it. Executives will never feel the fire until there's no more revenue coming in, sadly, so they won't do anything until it's too late.

eolesen wrote: ↑Mon Jul 04, 2022 4:17 pm Perhaps it's time to revisit attitudes towards encouraging people to consider trade education vs. entering into loand with six figure debt to get a degree in French Women's Poetry (and a minor in Native American Gender Studies) which don't guarantee any form of meaningful employment that can pay those loans back...

In that light, the railroad's a great place to work. So is being an iron worker or an electrician. You'll have to punch your ticket doing crap jobs for a couple years, but long term it's not such a bad gig.

Someone with a degree in "French Women's Poetry (and a minor in Native American Gender Studies)" has a better chance of having a better, more flexible schedule than someone who works in Class I. Class II and Class III's are definitely better to work for, but many of them don't offer the lucrative benefits and pay that Class I's have. Trades are definitely the way to go for someone who's not going into Business/STEM/Medicine, as the white-collar job market for everyone else is getting pretty full these days.

This class one behavior smacks of a monopoly unbridled. Too many squaks from others than RRs will Railroad the RRs into places they do not want to be.

Mr. (Officer, Captain?) West Point, you do have a "point".

I think all of the "Big Seven" (soon to be Six), realize that "the Gospel" (PSR) has its limitations, especially when it affects customer service ("hey, I give you fifty cars a day and you're telling me you switch me when it's convenient for you? Need you be reminded there are guys with eighteen wheels who are at my dock when I tell them to be").

But much of Saint Elwood's teachings will remain such as operating trains to meet where crews can be swapped and get home at night rather than being held away, and operating trains so that one isn't held on the main with a crew "dying" because the yard is full up.

Even BNSF that never claimed to embrace Saint Elwood to the extent of the others, have adopted some of his "teachings". For example, by my house, mostly covered hopper agricultural trains will often have general freight (manifest) included in the consist, and manifests will be held to 25mph when there is no reason to run them faster (hey, we got a fresh crew that's just going to Galesburg to tie up, so why burn up all that gas to run at 50?).

So, I hold many of Saint Elwood's teachings will live on.

disclaimer: author Long UNP

Another thing to consider is how dismal the infrastructure of many lines has become due to PSR. Every day, it seems like there is some sort of derailment, not to mention tons of branch lines that are left in really abhorrent condition due to the fact that some of those branch lines are not super profitable. For example, I live by a line that has had a solid anchor tenant for decades now, but because it's a small-ish lumber yard that only needs service once or twice a week, CR (ran by CSX and NS) ran it into the ground by not doing basic maintenance on it. Many of the crossings don't work, and there have been some derailments in recent years... They eventually passed the buck onto a shortline, and who knows if said shortline will come to realize that NS and CSX are forcing them to bite more than they can chew with all the work to be done...

west point wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 9:09 pm This class one behavior smacks of a monopoly unbridled. Too many squaks from others than RRs will Railroad the RRs into places they do not want to be.

Break them up, or let them continue to screw things up until they inevitably collapse and have to re-organize, hopefully with different executives that learned their lesson. Any regulations that are put on the Big Seven will trickle down onto the Class II's, III's, and shortlines that have been behaving themselves, especially compared to the Big Seven. Regulations that are targeted towards the big guys in an industry rarely don't affect the smaller guys in said industry, and ten years from now, if the government plays too heavy of a hand, they may make the situation worse. With the Big Seven crapping the bed and smaller railroads coming into the picture to save the day for many railroad customers, Congress should use this as an opportunity to do some long-needed trust busting. Doing so punishes Class I's but leaves the other railroads alone.

There is a strike being planned in regard to the new contract Class I's are offering the employees. Well, more of a walk off than a strike. Hopefully that will send a message to railroad management and executives to get their heads out of the sand. But IMO, the only thing these Wall Street guys listen to is money, railroad unions and organizations should focus on trying to get a few guys onto the executive board/get some significant shareholder status so they can start calling shots...

As an outsider whose closest affiliation with raiIroads is being a regular Capitol Limited passenger, I find this discussion interesting. A neighbor, a lawyer & Senate staffer in the 1970's/80's, drafted much of the Staggers Act. He had a photo wall of some of the meetings. It was his proudest achievement of that era of his life. Alas, he died before I had a chance to have a dialog with him over PSR.

The parallels to what happened to Boeing, once the finest aircraft designer/manufacturer in the world, are obvious. (I recommend reading Flying Blind.)

woodeen wrote: ↑Wed Jun 29, 2022 9:30 pm They could always nationalize them, it has been done before

No thanks, the government needs to stay out of business We aren't a Socialist Nation.

Socialism is community based, you're thinking of Communism...

The government is already involved with plenty of railroads at the state and federal level, they've been running Amtrak for over 50 years...

NHV 669 wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 2:39 pm Socialism is community based, you're thinking of Communism...

The government is already involved with plenty of railroads at the state and federal level, they've been running Amtrak for over 50 years...

Conrail was a government run railroad, and it did fine.

Yep, and they ran that for a few decades before the split to NS/CSXT, and it was definitely profitable.

That's the very issue at hand, Mr. NHV.

Any business, sector notwithstanding, gets too profitable, or if "locked up valuation" there, such as haven't adopted PSR sufficiently, that's when "it's time for a raid".

Of course regarding PSR, roads are having a "quick learn" that shippers with high value traffic don't like being dictated to when there are alternatives such as another road or highway. Now so far as "Farmer's Cooperative" elevator in Postville, IA goes, well......

scratchyX1 wrote: Conrail was a government run railroad, and it did fine.

Mmmmmmmmm. Not being entirely honest with that statement. Conrail didn't really run as a government agency, they ran as a railroad that was backstopped by government funding and management was expected to fix it, shrink it or sell it.

Arguably, they were a success only because Leo Crane and
Conrail's management were able to convince Congress to deregulate the railroads and stay out of their way.

But aside from that, Congress didn't meddle and come up with ridiculous laws such as ensuring West Virginia kept a fully staffed station stop for the dozens of passengers that may have boarded there weekly. Conrail didn't keep coming back for more money once Reagan was in office. They were cash flow positive within 3 years, posted profits after 5 years.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

Everything being proposed here as an argument for nationalizing the railroads using Conrail is an example is the antithesis of why Conrail was a success.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

"The Men Who Loved Trains" (formerly ex libris GBN; donated all my railroad books to a not for profit rail society) is indeed worth a read. It describes how a group headed by L Stanley Crane took some moribund roads - mainly the NYC and PRR, and I guess the ERIE for a little seasoning - and turned them into a viable business.

Whatever government funds were involved, it was one of those "success stories".

Finally lest we forget, Conrail remains a corporate entity, owning the trackage that comprises Shared Assets over which both Chessie and Topper have access to (CPKC also has some) for both ratemaking and physical access to the online industries.