YN2 vs. YN3 why switch?

What is the real reason for CSXT painting their units in YN3 paint? Almost everthing they have or had was painted in YN2. From U18Bs to AC4400CWs. Even a FP7s to a SD80MAC.
http://www.trainweb.org/csxphotos/photo ... CSX-bc.jpg
http://www.trainweb.org/csxphotos/photo ... CSX-bc.jpg
http://www.trainweb.org/csxphotos/photo ... CSX-bc.jpg
http://www.trainweb.org/csxphotos/photo ... CSX-bc.jpg
keep asking keep learning
MERRY CHRISTMAS

Terry,
Their repainting them because they want to show that their a new company.

John

New & improved, minus the improved.

It's suppose to show unity omoung the members of CSX's member railroads, particularly since bring their share of Conrail into the fold. Not to mention it's cheaper to keep to 2 paint colors available than 3.

CSX Conductor, would you like things to change for the better? If so, do you think that if employees like you continue having that attitude, they will?

I must say the YN2 paint scheme is my only favorite of the two. It's a lot more "cheerful" looking than YN3.

most U18B's were off the roster prior to being repainted, actually only a relatively few ever wore YN2 paint sheme

they have been gone for what, like 7-8 years, some longer

they have a new paint scheme, they paint things in the new scheme as needed, what is hard to understand about this??

There are still tons of corn-rail units out there in homo-light blue, they will be painted in the new csx scheme, and as the YN2 or other csx units get wrecked or need a paint job, they will be painted too

what is so hard about this to understand? companies change corporate logos all the time

just look at the ammount of money UPS is spending to put their new logo on equipment

Cowford wrote:CSX Conductor, would you like things to change for the better? If so, do you think that if employees like you continue having that attitude, they will?

Cowford, as I have told you before, it's some of the small bad manageria decisions that are made sometimes that baffle my mind. IE, hold a hot UPS train, during 'peak season' to make matters worse, for 2 slug freight trains. Is that good decision making on the STO's part? It's just little things like that that pt a sour taste in guys mouths sometimes. Overall I am happy working for them, but sometimes that tiny bit of negative gets to ya after you see the same crazy things happen repetetively.

I hear you, Conductor... some things defy logic. but honestly, other things that look crazy or stupid on the surface actually do have some logic behind them. Unfortunately, we all sometimes act like Pavlov's dog and react negatively to SOMETHING the company did, just because it did SOMETHING. There are (finally) a lot of things that CSX is doing RIGHT at this point...

On another note, do you think CSX should have run over Christmas to clean things up?

It looked to me like thy started tying things down a bit too early on Friday. Friday AM there were a least 12 or 15 trains tied-down @ Selkirk......the intention was to have crews home by 12 midnight, not 12 noon, LOL

Suprised to see that with the overflowing amount of power in Beacon Park Friday night and Saturday night, they still only put 2 loco's on an extra 119, which must have been a mile and a half long. Safe to say he the storm last night that he stalled on the mountain? Maybe they were anticipating the storm and held many of these units for Monday nights van trains in the event that east-bounds got tied-up........never know.

Cowford,
I understand that J'ville is trying but it seems that mid and/or lower mgt isn't getting the picture.

Roadster, what is it that you think they don't get? And trust me, I'm not assuming that you're wrong! By the way, do you work for CSX?

Lower managment has no clue whats going on no matter where anyone works. All they want is the job done any way possable and by a certen time just so that they can take all of the credit and make them selves look good while still kissen somones elses A** all at the same time.

Just as one example, local mgt seems mre concerned with the budget than service the customers. If a job was close to OT, the crews was order in and the customers not serviced. This happens mostly with the yard jobs which must switch the yard and set up trains for the next days jobs, road train p/u's, and interchange, then if time is available head out to service customers. Our terminal has lost 4 customers in the past year to a short line or trucks. Two new customers, recently started up and are serviced by one job which barely handles the customers it has now, yet no additional help has been added to deal with the extra work and these new customers are now seeing infrequent service. A short line carrier has stated that they could increase the interchange traffic by 50% but CSX can't/or won't improve it's service. (This interchange averages 30 - 50 cars inbound and about the same outbound every 2 days currently) So the work is going to the NS. Of note here, an Ethonal plant is being constructed on the shortlines service area and by the fall of 2005, they could be receiving unit grain trains from us (CSX) but local mangt. doesn't want to add extra crews, so it'll go to the NS. It appears CSX is only interested in those 2 tracks across the state and doesn't want any customers along the way.
Now maybe it's as you suggested that I'm not seeing the whole picture. But it is causing alot of concern. There are substancial customers here and the new customers mentioned above have stated that they can double and triple their business with us, if only they could get the service. The problem now includes lack of available crews because a number of people have relocated to larger terminals due to the uncertainty of this terminals future. The company preaches customer service, and safety, yet it's pactices are counter to that proclaimation. Needless to say it's confusing at best.
Yes, I am proud to be a CSX transportation employee of 5 years, and hope to make a lengthy career of it. As of last night CSX's stock was at 39 and climbing, which is good news. I just hope the trend continues as well as building and maintaining a strong customer base.

SRS125 - that blanket statement about front-line management is as unfair as someone saying that all union employees are (fill in the blank).

Roadster- I think you hit it right on the head by talking about conflict between budget and service. TMs and such have performance reviews and are judged largely on keeping within/below budget. They're not rewarded/critiqued for revenue growth/service excellence/etc. which is a huge mistake in my book. There are many others that share that opinion and I have to hope that this will be given a cleser look in the future. One thing to keep in mind: Class 1s are finally "getting it" in that they need to run like a utility- which means less flexibility and special deals, switching or otherwise, for the customers. This'll drive some customers away or to shortlines... that's ok... the positive trade-off is that service consistency and transit time should improve over time. A lot of customers hate this- esp. the ones that are "high-maintenance." And a lot of employees see this as being anti-customer. But its the only way to improve fluidity in the system and best allocate resources. CN was the first... and now they're a money making machine with happy customers.