UP looking to eliminate train dispatchers

[Federal Register: July 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 144)]
[Notices]
[Page 42712-42713]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27jy06-98]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration


Petition for Waiver of Compliance

In accordance with part 211 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) has received a request for a waiver of compliance
with certain requirements of its safety standards. The individual
petition is described below, including the party seeking relief, the
regulatory provisions involved, the nature of the relief being
requested, and the petitioner's arguments in favor of relief.

Union Pacific Railroad Company

[Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-2006-24840]

The Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) is initiating a program to
implement ``Remote Authority'' technology, designed to permit

[[Page 42713]]

authorized users in the field to request, be granted, or release on-
track authority. To facilitate the implementation of this technology,
UP is requesting that FRA suspend compliance with certain rules in
accordance with the provisions contained in 49 CFR 211.51.
The Remote Authority is a web-based application that will permit
authorized users to request, be granted, or release Foul Time, Track
Permit, Track & Time or Track Warrant authority to occupy a main track
or other controlled track. The central office component consists of one
or more Remote Authority servers that will receive requests from
authorized users for on-track authority or requests to release on-track
authority. If the user is authorized to request or release on-track
authority, and the request meets established criteria, the request is
forwarded to the Union Pacific's Computer Aided Dispatching system for
further processing. Requests that do not meet established criteria are
rejected at this point in the process, and the user is provided the
opportunity to change or cancel the request.
Requests for on-track authority are received by the dispatching
system and must meet established criteria to be eligible for issuance
by the dispatching system without dispatcher intervention. If the
established criteria are not satisfied, the request is placed in the
appropriate authority request queue, and the train dispatcher is
notified.
In this regard, the UP requests relief to permit the dispatching
system to grant or release on-track authority in response to a valid
request from an authorized user without intervention on the part of the
train dispatcher or control operator who controls train movements on
that track. The UP hereby seeks relief from 49 CFR 214.321(a)(1), which
requires a track occupancy authority for working limits to be issued to
the roadway worker in charge by the train dispatcher or control
operator who controls train movements on that track.
Access to the Remote Authority application within the UP network
requires the user to present valid credentials consisting of standard
user identification and secret password. For off-network access, a
Virtual Private Network (VPN) connection must be established by the
employee before presenting valid credentials. Within the Remote
Authority application, individual users are further restricted in the
functions they may perform.
Interested parties are invited to participate in this proceeding by
submitting written views, data, or comments. Although FRA does not
anticipate scheduling a public hearing in connection with this
proceeding, if any interested party desires an opportunity for oral
comment, they should notify FRA in writing before the end of the
comment period and specify the basis for their request.
All communications concerning this proceeding should identify the
appropriate docket number (FRA-2006-24840) and may be submitted by any
of the following methods:
Web site: http://dms.dot.gov. Follow the instructions for

submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site.
Fax: 202-493-2251.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401,
Washington, DC 20590-001.
Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility, Room PL-401 on
the Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
Communications received within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable. All
written communications concerning these proceedings are available for
examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above
facility. All documents in the public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket facility's Web
site at http://dms.dot.gov.

Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000, (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78). The statement
may also be found at http://dms.dot.gov.


Issued in Washington, DC, on July 20, 2006.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
[FR Doc. E6-11964 Filed 7-26-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is from Docket No. FRA-2006-24840. Any thoughts?

MNRR_RTC wrote:(Excerpt): ... This is from Docket No. FRA-2006-24840. Any thoughts?

Good idea, reduce radio clutter.
Docket closed, past 45 days.
Docket not found through search.
URL's wrong, removed dot.
Avatar huge.

Branch lines, and those less travelled places, eat into the Dispatchers time. He has to do the same thing, that they are moving into the hands of the operating employees, if given an operating variance/waiver, from the FRA. The crews would go into the CMS system, and input where they want to go, in what direction(s) and time requested. Computer will authenticate, then verify, and issue warrants, based on request. DS does this all day long, with about a million other things, as well. (notice that the DS is still contacted, if there is a "problem" with the issuance/annulment, of orders) I don't feel that any DS's will lose work behind this, as the carriers probably already have some extra work planned, to dump in their laps. A LOT less radio chatter, and freeing up the DS, to plan efficient meets, on the mainline, sounds like a winner, to me.......

Are Dispatchers Aggreement or non aggreement workers?

Agreement. They are now part of the BLE,T. This most likely is a welcome change, as they are still overwhelmed, from taking on the towers responsibilities, when they closed. I still don't believe this will effect any desks, or seniority. Could be wrong, though.......

You guys need to understand as well that a dispatcher working a busy line doesnt work a slow line either.

3 4 or 5 slow traffic lines would be controlled by on DS at once while the heavy used lines would be 1 per DP. I sat with a Dispatcher in OCS territory one day for about 2 hours. He had about 5 subs he was in control of and he only had 1 train total to worry about.

Then I sat with a CTC dispatcher and he has 10 trains and 3 forman to take ahold of.

gp9rm4108 wrote:You guys need to understand as well that a dispatcher working a busy line doesnt work a slow line either.

3 4 or 5 slow traffic lines would be controlled by on DS at once while the heavy used lines would be 1 per DP. I sat with a Dispatcher in OCS territory one day for about 2 hours. He had about 5 subs he was in control of and he only had 1 train total to worry about.

Then I sat with a CTC dispatcher and he has 10 trains and 3 forman to take ahold of.

I've been inside several dispatching centers. Never saw a DS, with time on his hands. Even the short lines, have combined centers, run by RailAmerica, where they still get the life worked out of them. Never saw one, who had it easy.......

They could farm the branch lines and locals out to a dispatcher in Bombay! That would be fun. I would love to see this system implemented especially on the locals since you have to call and wait 20 minutes to get ahold of the guy to either get or release your TW. And those of us on the high iron may be able to talk to the dispatcher once we tone him up without having to wait 5 mins. Good idea I say.

slchub wrote:They could farm the branch lines and locals out to a dispatcher in Bombay! That would be fun. I would love to see this system implemented especially on the locals since you have to call and wait 20 minutes to get ahold of the guy to either get or release your TW. And those of us on the high iron may be able to talk to the dispatcher once we tone him up without having to wait 5 mins. Good idea I say.

Bombay??? Come on, Sclub. I believe you meant Bangalore.............

Mr Golden Arm, whatever happened to the ATDA? They held the contract for the Train Dispatcher craft "back in my day" on most properties including Amtrak.

They seem to have an active website, so they must hold a contract somewhere today; but I'm surprised to learn that the BLE is seeking to represent crafts other than their namesake.

But then rail unions have been on more of a merger kick in the past ten years than even have railroads.

slchub wrote: I would love to see this system implemented especially on the locals since you have to call and wait 20 minutes to get ahold of the guy to either get or release your TW. And those of us on the high iron may be able to talk to the dispatcher once we tone him up without having to wait 5 mins. Good idea I say.

Had to re-open this oldie. Branch desk here, handles quite a bit including Eagle Grove lines, Fairmont and Rake branch, Chippawa Falls, WI, Adams Sub, Mankato Sub, Peoria Sub, Oskaloosa branch and Waterloo terminal. I remember the old guy at the merger, Kenny. He would hand out warrants at 7 am like clockwork, til he had to start using the UP computer, then boy did that slow things down. He took about a year or two of it, and retired.

Right now, the day trick on the Branch handles 10 locals, 3 manifests (not including the Peoria sub which is busier that the rest of his lines) and 7 terminals (yards). He no longer runs the Rake or Fairmont branch as it was given to the Spine (which runs from St. Paul to Polo, Missouri and Des Moines and Mason City trackage).

This new system while freeing up the DS's time on MoW warrants, would not help with other chores they handle (cabs, power, yard co-ordination, crews, track issues, bulletins). Many times when we need a warrant, we need a live person to co-ordinate moves, such as meets, limits, and other things a computer could not figure out.

This makes me a bit queasy. No matter how perfect and sound the technology I often find it missapplied. Instead of using the technology to operational advantage it is applied to save money on labor. Some companies are finding that even automated telephone systems, while saving on opertor costs, are draining the bottom line because customers give up trying to contact the company via telephone and often dissapear all together. Other business have been pennywise and pounds foolish with technology and railroads have been no exception. If this technology is properly used, it will probably bring effeciencies of some kind. But if it is missaplied to just replace people where people can do a better and safer job in the long run, then management really loses. Nearest thing to this right now is remote control locomotive switching. The number of time lost and life lost and damage accidents shows that there are misapplications of the technology because management just wants to save money my eliminating people. Other business are coming back to people as their most important asset and tools. Will railroads cut off the middle steps and not go to aanother place where they have to come back from?

I understand 100% that dispatchers are busy, and their territory has gotten bigger with more trains, less people, etc. What amazes me is how people think they have it so rough. They go to work, know that it'll be a hell of a day, even if it's busy, they know they will go home in exactly 8 hours. I'd take that in a minute. With 2 days off a week.

MuffMasterson wrote:I understand 100% that dispatchers are busy, and their territory has gotten bigger with more trains, less people, etc. What amazes me is how people think they have it so rough. They go to work, know that it'll be a hell of a day, even if it's busy, they know they will go home in exactly 8 hours. I'd take that in a minute. With 2 days off a week.

It ain't easy getting your brains beaten in for 8 hours. I do what I do because I love it. If not, I would of taken the locomotive engineers job last year. When you are dealing with several trains, track foremen, signal maintainers, your bosses asking all sorts of questions and the phone ringing off the hook all day, it does take alot out of you. Believe me when I tell you that the grass isn't always greener on the otherside.

UP dispatchers are for the most part nonagreement. When the BLE added the T, the ATDD became the ATDA again. They hold the contract for NJT, NS, former SOO, CSX (both sides), BNSF, Amtrak, and Conrail leftovers. I'd love a desk where I can get to deal with people in less than 20 mins. Takes me the first two hours to get down to one radio lit up. I can answer the radios much quicker if I let my administrative issues go, but crews really hate not having rides when they tie down and cut crossings, among other issues.