Western Railroad Discussion > BNSF taking aggressive measures

The BNSF CEO is taking agressive measures to improve service, one man in the cab.
Wow, crew shortage problem solved. Didin't see that coming.....being sarcastic, not serious.

Posted from Android

Did they suspend mandantory use of Trip Optimizer to allow somewhat higher speeds?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/11/22 20:46 by railstiesballast.

https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/bnsf-taking-aggressive-measures-to-restore-service-farmer-says/


BNSF has been loosing close to an employee an hour for the past 7-10 days.... gee, I wonder why.


~ Mr. MRL



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/22 02:37 by MrMRL.

Perhaps this explains the MRL takeover.
The only way to gain employees is to buy them.

No matter who the top dog is, it's still the same old thing to mgmt :'Ya gotta beat em down."  She should have to spend 1.5 months in the cab with the same crew, same work . Then she just might learn a lot.

Perhaps the STB hearings currently going on will force rail management to improve service.  

The STB is getting an earful of testimony from shippers, about bad service (mainly about monster-long trains, and
stored loco's.).  The STB has the power to stop these rail management practices.

This is how rail management bring Government regulation on themselves.

The far end of everything is that one man in the cab is going to come regardless and while Conductors will be needed they will be fewer. The reduction MUST be by natural attrition and possibly buyouts properly priced in select spots. Another problem will the lopsided rosters that will occur. By having two man crews you have a source of supply for new Engineers...if there are far more Engineers than trainmen....well I'm not sure how to do that math.

engineerinvirginia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The far end of everything is that one man in the
> cab is going to come regardless and while
> Conductors will be needed they will be fewer. The
> reduction MUST be by natural attrition and
> possibly buyouts properly priced in select spots.
> Another problem will the lopsided rosters that
> will occur. By having two man crews you have a
> source of supply for new Engineers...if there are
> far more Engineers than trainmen....well I'm not
> sure how to do that math.

So what happens when they get one-man crew, and employees continue to quit in significant numbers, and they are still short.

Englewood Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Perhaps this explains the MRL takeover.
> The only way to gain employees is to buy them.

Remember when railroading was a respectable job and folks talked with pride about the company they worked for?

(For those who started after the late 80s, yes, there was such a time.)

TAW

needles_sub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The BNSF CEO is taking agressive measures


Behavior so far has been pretty agressive.

TAW

TAW Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Englewood Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Perhaps this explains the MRL takeover.
> > The only way to gain employees is to buy them.
>
> Remember when railroading was a respectable job
> and folks talked with pride about the company they
> worked for?
>
> (For those who started after the late 80s, yes,
> there was such a time.)
>
> TAW

I remember those days. Railroading used to be fun.

Englewood Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Perhaps this explains the MRL takeover.
> The only way to gain employees is to buy them.

I thought the reason for the early lease termination was because Mr Washington is 88 years old and his children had no interest in running a railroad.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Englewood Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Perhaps this explains the MRL takeover.
> > The only way to gain employees is to buy them.
>
> I thought the reason for the early lease
> termination was because Mr Washington is 88 years
> old and his children had no interest in running a
> railroad.

Methinks there might be a tad bit of sarcasm involved in that statement.

TAW

SOO6617 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> engineerinvirginia Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The far end of everything is that one man in
> the
> > cab is going to come regardless and while
> > Conductors will be needed they will be fewer.
> The
> > reduction MUST be by natural attrition and
> > possibly buyouts properly priced in select
> spots.
> > Another problem will the lopsided rosters that
> > will occur. By having two man crews you have a
> > source of supply for new Engineers...if there
> are
> > far more Engineers than trainmen....well I'm
> not
> > sure how to do that math.
>

> So what happens when they get one-man crew, and
> employees continue to quit in significant numbers,
> and they are still short.

you do have a point and I'm already badly overworked so I can only presume they are going to kill me. I got five years though so maybe I can squeak through.


 

The Conductors will become Rapid Responders with cushy rides in nice pickups until something breaks.

Out 

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Conductors will become Rapid Responders with
> cushy rides in nice pickups until something
> breaks.
>

Yeah, I'm picturing, on the railroads I'm familiar with, a train in trouble between Essex and Summit MT or between Skykomish and Scenic WA. A conductor on the engine would be walking 2-3 miles. The Rapid Responder...well, either end of the train is miles from any kind of road access. First comes miles of walking to get to the train before starting the miles of walking to figure out what's wrong and fix it. Going to need tools, fusees, wire, etc.? Pack it with, because you can't just run to the truck to get it.

TAW

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Conductors will become Rapid Responders with
> cushy rides in nice pickups until something
> breaks.
>
> Out 

Conductors with high seniority will be able to anyways. How many master conductor/rapid responder positions will there really need to be…a couple for each subdivision with forced 12 hour shifts. Doesn’t leave a lot of work for the other 13,000 conductors on the system.

Posted from iPhone

I do remember that.  It all went away with the megamergers of the last 40 years or so. 

===================================================


TAW Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Remember when railroading was a respectable job
> and folks talked with pride about the company they
> worked for?
>
> (For those who started after the late 80s, yes,
> there was such a time.)
>
> TAW

TAW Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> callum_out Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The Conductors will become Rapid Responders
> with
> > cushy rides in nice pickups until something
> > breaks.
> >
>
> Yeah, I'm picturing, on the railroads I'm familiar
> with, a train in trouble between Essex and Summit
> MT or between Skykomish and Scenic WA. A conductor
> on the engine would be walking 2-3 miles. The
> Rapid Responder...well, either end of the train is
> miles from any kind of road access. First comes
> miles of walking to get to the train before
> starting the miles of walking to figure out what's
> wrong and fix it. Going to need tools, fusees,
> wire, etc.? Pack it with, because you can't just
> run to the truck to get it.
>
> TAW

If they only had a fix for that.......like a pickup with railroad wheels or something.

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Conductors will become Rapid Responders with
> cushy rides in nice pickups until something
> breaks.
> 

And they'll be paid a basic day.