Western Railroad Discussion > One Person Crews hitting the News

King 5 News and NWCN (NorthWest Cable News) is running a bit about the one person crews on trains.

http://www.nwcn.com/home/Proposal-for-one-person-crews-has-rail-workers-upset-269305491.html

Ted Curphey
Ontario, OR



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/30/14 20:54 by funnelfan.

It's a topic that ties back nicely to safety, esp with the widespread concern about ethanol and oil train safety.

Having a good spokesperson making a case for two person crews in the news, on TV etc is important to getting the message out.

The railroads are making plenty of money, and this should not be allowed for a whole variety of reasons. The job is lonely enough. Can you imagine trying to stay alert out in the middle of nowhere alone? What if you need to do the necessary? How about verifying signals in bad weather? Repairing an air hose? Changing out a knuckle and/or pin? Dealing with a grade xing incident alone, and so on.... What kind of people come up with this crap? This is exactly the kind of mentality that demands unions exist. I know the fools envision completely automated trains, but we are quite a ways from that being implemented. A seven figured tonnage train is not the same as BART, and they still use an operator as a safeguard. If we keep eliminating people from the process, there will literally be nothing for anyone to do; no jobs of substance, no one to afford even the cheap Chinese crap the trains are hauling. The feared socialism will ride the wings of technology and the efficiencies of automation and outsourcing that have been running rampant throughout our system. Politicians will be shacked with the job of securing more developed forms of welfare to compensate--not a pretty picture. Beyond all of that, the inherent thorniness of running trains needs the human touch to keep it in check through all of the variables in which they operate. This is going too far. Was that a rant? I guess it was a rant. Rant over.....

g-spotter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The job is lonely enough. Can you
> imagine trying to stay alert out in the middle of
> nowhere alone? What if you need to do the
> necessary? How about verifying signals in bad
> weather? Repairing an air hose?

I don't want to get into the crew size debate, but in the interest of intellectual honesty, but you just pretty much described truck drivers.

And we all know that truckers never doze off and cause wrecks. More often than not fatal for the four wheelers. Ok, magnify that by 10,000 with a train. Think Lac Megantic. The one man crew might work in certain situations, like short line. But not many.

I suppose Amtrak is a little bit of a different deal, because they do carry a crew in the back, but I remember talking to one engineer that said they operate alone in the cab if the run is less than 5 hours. Someone correct me if I am wrong. I suspect the same kind of lame thinking will ultimately infect the flying business. Might be kind of like the man and dog flight crew. The man is there to watch the machine and the dog is there to bite him if he touches anything...

Not to be contrary, but consider that if a truck driver feels too drowsy to drive, he can probably select a place to pull over on a rural highways for a short nap, or pull into a truck stop along a freeway. Same goes for nature calls. The pressure/stress is bound to be less for the trucker who has these options. The truck driver may end up behind schedule if he is on one, but he will not be parked in the middle of the highway blocking other traffic to do so unlike a stopped freight train. Similarly a truck usually has the ability to pull to the side of the road if a mechanical issue comes up again not blocking the highway for other traffic vs a train that is blocking a busy mainline due to a blown air hose with only the engineer on scene to walk the train, tie down brakes etc. I don't believe one person in a truck cab has nearly the adverse safety ramifications as one person train crews.

g-spotter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is exactly the kind of mentality that demands unions exist.

Except that it was a general committee of the union that threw their members under the bus by negotiating this stupid agreement behind closed doors with the carrier for 18 months before springing it on them. It's getting harder to figure out whose side UTU/SMART is on these days.

a737flyer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I suppose Amtrak is a little bit of a different
> deal, because they do carry a crew in the back,
> but I remember talking to one engineer that said
> they operate alone in the cab if the run is less
> than 5 hours. Someone correct me if I am wrong.
> I suspect the same kind of lame thinking will
> ultimately infect the flying business. Might be
> kind of like the man and dog flight crew. The man
> is there to watch the machine and the dog is there
> to bite him if he touches anything...

On the Coast Starlate the run single engineer from Sacto to San Jose, from San Jose to SLO, and from SLO to LA and have done so for the past 10 or more years. Above Sactp I believe they run two men to Klamath Falls and Portland.
C.

Carol Voss
Bakersfield, CA

a737flyer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I suppose Amtrak is a little bit of a different
> deal, because they do carry a crew in the back,
> but I remember talking to one engineer that said
> they operate alone in the cab if the run is less
> than 5 hours. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

Amtrak is engineer-only on runs that are scheduled to be 6 hours or less (departure to arrival). But it's not such a great deal the way I understand it. This is the pertinent article from the CBA:

b. A Second Passenger Engineer will be required on all off-Corridor trains operating over six (6) hours from the departure at the initial station of the assignment to the arrival at the final station of the assignment. If a train scheduled to operate in less than six (6) hours from the departure at the initial station of the assignment to the arrival at the final station of the assignment requires more than six (6) hours for the trip on ten (10) or more occasions during any fifteen (15) consecutive trips, a Second Passenger Engineer will be required on said train until the operating time is reduced to less than six (6) hours on ten (10) or more occasions during any fifteen (15) consecutive trips.

So you could work up to 12 hours by yourself as many as 9 times in a 15-trip window and they still don't have to add a second engineer.

jbbane Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not to be contrary, but consider that if a truck
> driver feels too drowsy to drive, he can probably
> select a place to pull over on a rural highways
> for a short nap, or pull into a truck stop along a
> freeway. Same goes for nature calls. The
> pressure/stress is bound to be less for the
> trucker who has these options. The truck driver
> may end up behind schedule if he is on one, but he
> will not be parked in the middle of the highway
> blocking other traffic to do so unlike a stopped
> freight train. Similarly a truck usually has the
> ability to pull to the side of the road if a
> mechanical issue comes up again not blocking the
> highway for other traffic vs a train that is
> blocking a busy mainline due to a blown air hose
> with only the engineer on scene to walk the train,
> tie down brakes etc. I don't believe one person in
> a truck cab has nearly the adverse safety
> ramifications as one person train crews.

My point was not that driving a truck alone has fewer potential problems than operating a train alone, only that ten of thousands of truck drivers put in 10-12 hour days, often with little rest in sometimes VERY tough conditions and 99.999% get where they are going day in an day out. I don't have a dog in this fight and it makes no difference to me, but if I were put in charge of winning this argument with the railroads, I would approach it from the angle of efficiency and cost savings from the railroad's perspective. I think the safety issue is a losing argument, because there just is not any real proof that you can put down on paper that two man crews are safer than one person trains. And you can't use the "prevented accidents" claim, because it is unquantifiable, and unless you get a whole bunch of crew members to fess up to narrowly averted disasters, it means nothing. If you want to hang onto the conductor positions on the trains, I suggest you frame it as how it will make the railroads more money. Just my opinion.

"because there just is not any real proof that you can put down on paper that two man crews are safer than one person trains. And you can't use the "prevented accidents" claim, because it is unquantifiable, and unless you get a whole bunch of crew members to fess up to narrowly averted disasters, it means nothing."

Why don't they fess up? Because they get FIRED! Airline pilots can turn themselves in without fear of discipline and the event is used to evaluate ways to make flying safer. No so on the railroads, they just want to fire employees.

So you can't "prove" two person crews are safer because when it works out that way it is an accident you DON'T read about in the papers.

Posted from Windows Phone OS 7

trainjunkie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> (snip)
>
> So you could work up to 12 hours by yourself as
> many as 9 times in a 15-trip window and they still
> don't have to add a second engineer.

That sounds like an issue to be reviewed when the contract comes up for negotiation.

About the only thing truckers have in common with freight railroader's is that they move freight.

You don't compare cruise ship captains, airline pilots and Amtrak Engineers with school bus driver's do you? None of them easy jobs. All very different modes of moving people. Comparing a couple general aspects of each job out of context is not a matter of intellectual honesty, more like ignorance. You really should listen to the people here who actually do the work. Their concerns have been accurately expressed in related threads.

Sphogger

Yep, what sphogger said^^^!

Comparing a semi-truck & trailer - or even those "B" trains (2-trailers?) with (in some cases on our territory) a 12,000 ft., 20,000 ton Distributed Power Train
or a 152 car loaded coal train...? Sorry:)

Posted from iPhone

CarolVoss Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> On the Coast Starlate the run single engineer from
> Sacto to San Jose, from San Jose to SLO, and from
> SLO to LA and have done so for the past 10 or more
> years. Above Sactp I believe they run two men to
> Klamath Falls and Portland.
> C.

That is true, but only on runs that are scheduled for 6 hours or less (in spite of all you read, those runs don't often go over 7 hours). Also, there are two qualified conductors on the train. The engineer calls all restrictive signals to the conductor who confirms, and the conductor reminds the engineer(by radio)of all temporary speed restrictions two miles out. The conductors are there, just feet away, in any emergency to immediately provide assistance. Hardly the same as being alone in some remote inaccessible canyon miles from the nearest help.

Barry

I really want to hire out, but if this bull crap gets cleared, I'm sorry, that's a disaster waiting to happen, I for one am for 2 person crews on not only the specialized trains they mentioned, but on all of them!

sphogger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> About the only thing truckers have in common with
> freight railroader's is that they move freight.
>
> You don't compare cruise ship captains, airline
> pilots and Amtrak Engineers with school bus
> driver's do you? None of them easy jobs. All
> very different modes of moving people. Comparing
> a couple general aspects of each job out of
> context is not a matter of intellectual honesty,
> more like ignorance. You really should listen to
> the people here who actually do the work. Their
> concerns have been accurately expressed in related
> threads.
>
> Sphogger

I read their concerns, but that has no bearing on whether they are accurate or not. I'm just trying to tell you that I don't think the safety angle is a winning argument when you look at the number of accidents that happen and have happened with larger crews. If you guys want to keep going down that road with the evidence or lack it of that exists now, be prepared to lose. That's all I'm saying. I'm in the trucking business, so I could care less if you put TEN people in cab.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> trainjunkie Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > (snip)
> >
> > So you could work up to 12 hours by yourself as
> > many as 9 times in a 15-trip window and they
> still
> > don't have to add a second engineer.
>
> That sounds like an issue to be reviewed when the
> contract comes up for negotiation.

Not to mention that if an Amtrak train loses over 6 hours in a single crew district for nine days in a row, a single man in the cab may be the least of the worries!

junctiontower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sphogger Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > About the only thing truckers have in common
> with
> > freight railroader's is that they move freight.
>
> >
> > You don't compare cruise ship captains, airline
> > pilots and Amtrak Engineers with school bus
> > driver's do you? None of them easy jobs. All
> > very different modes of moving people.
> Comparing
> > a couple general aspects of each job out of
> > context is not a matter of intellectual
> honesty,
> > more like ignorance. You really should listen
> to
> > the people here who actually do the work.
> Their
> > concerns have been accurately expressed in
> related
> > threads.
> >
> > Sphogger
>
> I read their concerns, but that has no bearing on
> whether they are accurate or not. I'm just trying
> to tell you that I don't think the safety angle is
> a winning argument when you look at the number of
> accidents that happen and have happened with
> larger crews. If you guys want to keep going down
> that road with the evidence or lack it of that
> exists now, be prepared to lose. That's all I'm
> saying. I'm in the trucking business, so I could
> care less if you put TEN people in cab.


Junction, you really don't get it, if they do single person crews and a disaster happens, mainly in no mans land, how long do you t hink it'll take for help to arrive, especially if the problem's way deep in the train, or worse, a break in two because of something unexpected and all that! I for one am with most of these guys, besides, the belt packs in the freight yards aren't a big cost saving measure in some yards where they got it and it's slow compared to when you had 2 people doing the job!