Canadian Railroads > CN & CP Attendance Policies?

See this thread (link(, as I've posted on the Western & Eastern Boards about the new draconian "Attendance Policies" now in effect on various carriers since my not-to-long ago retirement. That I didn't have to deal with. Bottom line, on the UPRR now, you are are pulled in for investigation and discipline if you miss 6 days out of 90 (three months). Third time this happens, PERMANENT TERMINATION. While the "average worker" gets 24 days off every 90. So I wonder what it's like on the CP & CN, both north of the border and on the U.S. portions thereof. And what happened to the BLET and UTU/SMART to allow this to happen?!? Am I ever glad to be retired for what you guys face--this from one who never received any discipline, too. But if I were young again, would I go into the RR industry--as much as I loved my career as a hoghead? Sadly, I would not.

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?1,3532854,3532854#msg-3532854

Not sure of the policy CN has in place now,from my own experience a term management like to use for discipline was "failure to protect assignment". As an example a year or two before I retired, during the Christmas and New Year holiday season, the usual bulletin came out that "due to crew shortages, customer service requirements etc etc" all running trade employees are required to be available for work and to cover their assignments. A day or two before Dec 31 I developed a horrible head and chest cold. I eventually went to the emergency ward at the hospital, after a five hour wait, the doctor diagnosed bronchitis, prescribed antibiotics, bed rest for at least two days as well as a note for my "employer" to the effect I was too ill to work and needed several days off. I dutifully informed the trainmaster, called the assistant superintendent, they both went ballistic, I then booked off sick. This was at least 16 hours before my next trip to Prince George. None of this was good enough for CN and I received notice to appear for an investigation for "failing to protect assignment". Eventually after a month or two,the whole scenario went away, although there was a "letter" placed on my file, the Union eventually had that removed. I was legitimately sick and still had this hassle. These "attendance policies" are a bunch of BS and just a petty way of harassing and intimidating the employees. Rant over. Doug

My running trades career with CP in BC spanned the years 1972 to 2005.

Attendance policies changed greatly over those years.

For many years, there were no hours of service regulations governing train and engine crews. Instead, union collective agreements and local management policies governed how and when crew people could work.

On MacAdoo Award (time plus miles pay system) railways, engine and train crews were limited to 3800 miles per month, or 4200 on fast track railways in freight service, 4500 in passenger, with no limits at all until 1961 in switcher service. The accepted practice for many years was to make your monthly milage limit ASAP and lay off. Depending on the type of work and the average trip time, 3800 miles could mean working every other day with perhaps a couple of days off, or in some terminals, everyone worked like mad and got two weeks off.

This all changed after the head on collision near Hinton AB. in 1987. The cause of the collision was a freight train running past a signal into an eastbound passenger train. There were many fatalities. The subsequent investigation showed that it was a common practice for train and engine crews based out of Jasper AB. to work without rest for prolonged periods so that they could get a week or so "off for miles".

The investigation showed that the work habits of running trades employees varied greatly between railways and individual terminals.
Some rest and work cycles practiced were outright dangerous, as discovered in northern Manitoba.

One of the features of the unregulated era was that the railways had large numbers of qualified employees, after 1970 many were cross trained to work as engineers and conductors. There was a large "pool" of available train crew members following the abolishment of the tail end trainman position in the late 1970's. The position was abolished by attrition, (like locomotive firemen) meaning that the second crew person in the caboose was only required if available, so these people served as a source of conductors and engineers when the regular crewmen in other "chain gang" crews were off for miles.

The Federal Regulations introduced following the "Foisy Inquiry" really tightened up how train and engine crews worked, rested and took time off. Of course, changes to the collective agreements in reaction to the regulations further changed how and when running trades crews will work.

Up into the late 1970's, employment of train and engine crews on the big Canadian railway took place at the "Division Point" level. A Superintendant hired and fired the employees, with some input from the regional general manager. Payroll was handled locally, as was the operation of the trains under the direction of a chief dispatcher. The roundhouse foreman, master mechanic and the roadmaster hired and fired shop staff, carmen and track workers. Head office just supplied the money to operate the Divisions.
Where I worked, the policy was to have lots of employees. The junior employees were kept hungry, and worked the weekends when the older employees took trips off.

Starting in the 1980's, the "Divisions" were abolished in place of central management. I'm going to say the payroll decreased by at least 50% in the 1990's and 2000's. Now, there are simply no other people to run the trains if someone is unavailable.
Hence, the advent of "attendance policies".

I had few living expenses in the 1970's, and could afford the time off between trips of the old unregulated system. I actually enjoyed being a "part timer" during those years.

excellent post e_g!

on CN you cannot just "layoff"... and up until recently you could not "book unfit".

In unassigned road service, you can book up to 24 hrs. rest at your home terminal; thankfully on CN after every 1075 miles there is also the option to take up to 48 hrs. off; this is called an EO and you must request this in the CATS (Crew Assignment and Timekeeping System) in advance.


This essentially gives someone working in unassigned road service a pseudo-weekend every week or so;)

we also are allotted 12 PLDs (personal leave days) that are unpaid but also are apportioned on a quota basis per terminal i.e. everbody can't be off on a PLD for the Grey Cup (Cdn version of the Super Bowl).

I believe booking sick still requires a Dr. note - which in some ways is a burden on an already-stressed medical system, i.e. you have say, "mild food poisoning" with attendant flu-like symptoms, and will be over it in 12-18 hrs. but now you must go to the Doc when you're over it to get a note.

IMHO, smart mgmt. would simply look for patterns (i.e. someone who booked sick every friday, or every payday) and deal with those individuals, not require everyone to produce a Dr. note.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 09/27/14 14:18 by xcnsnake.