Nostalgia & History > Conductor's Trip Record Question

This is a follow-up to the post by rswebber on 16 March. I also have acquired some conductor’s trip record books. The conductor whose books I have lived in Needles. Sometimes he worked Needles to LA and sometimes Needles to Winslow. Needles to Winslow was the Albuquerque Division. Needles to LA was the Los Angeles Division. The pages shown are a day (night, actually) when he worked #23 from Winslow to Needles. Anybody have any idea on how he could have seniority on two different divisions? Thanks for your help.

---

A lot of long mile passenger jobs were inter-divisional runs with the pool spaces divided up among the divisions in proportion to the miles run.

Railroad divisions are separate and apart from Seniority districts.

Bob Krieger
Cheyenne, WY

That's what I don't understand. Seniority districts don't overlap divisions do they You only have seniority on the division where you were hired? Santa Fe did have some inter-divisional runs as the previous indicates. But this conductor never worked through Needles. He either worked from or to. Winslow to LA could have been one seniority district?

Bob3985 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Railroad divisions are separate and apart from
> Seniority districts.

Railroad divisions govern operational, managerial and budgetary issues whereas seniority districts and rights govern via their respective labor agreements who is entitled to do the work, orders of call, and how specific labor work rules are to be applied. For example, where a yard or road district is consolidated with another yard or seniority district, agreements are either negotiated or arbitrated between the affected parties spelling out certain rights. Seniority may be Dove-tailed, or top and bottomed, depending on the circumstances. In the end, certain participants may wind up with dual seniority. For example, an engineer may receive prior (superior) rights on that part of the merged territory where he formerly worked, but subordinate rights on that part of the territory where he didn't formerly have rights.

Where implementing agreements cannot be negotiated between the affected parties, including the rail carriers involved, a mediator or arbitrator may be asked to assist in resolution. Similarly, where there are disputes over which class or craft is entitled to perform the work in question, the National Mediation Board can be petitioned to make a ruling. Occasionally, there can be disputes within the union over who should be entitled to the work. We had one such dispute between SP Western Lines and SP Eastern Lines UTU. In certain circumstances, the STB (formerly ICC) may get involved.

In the initial example above it appears either the conductor either did have dual divisional rights, likely from some interdivisional agreement or coordiation, or he could have been "borrowed" pursuant to some letter of agreement or past practice due to circumstances like a manpower shortage, or emergency.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/21/18 21:39 by WhistlenBruce.

If you see a brakeman named "M. Wright" in any of those trip records, that was my great-grandfather. He worked out of Needles as well during the same time frame as the record you posted. While I don't have his records in a easy to access location, he seemed to only work between Needles and Winslow in the records I have.

You have to remember west of Belen and Albuquerque was the Coast Lines. There agreements were different from the Eastern Lines and Western Lines. I have a Coast Lines agreement. You would be surprised what is in it. I worked on the Eastern Lines. I know what you saying.

I have a 1949 Arizona ETT. The line from Needles to Barstow, California was part of the Arizona Division.

Plus, I have a 1952 Los Angeles ETT. The Needles to Barstow became part of the Los Angeles Division.

The conductor that filled out the book had rights Needles to Barstow and Needles to Seligman (freight service) or Winslow in passenger service.

I can not figure out why the Arizona name was replaced with Albuquerque. The superintendents office as well as the dispatchers office remained in Winslow.

The conductor had rights since he was working the Arizona Division. The agreement does not mention that the Needles to Barstow belong to another division.

It isn't what it seems to be!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/18/18 10:06 by ACL3042.

Very nice. Post more pages please.

ACL3042 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You have to remember west of Belen and Albuquerque
> was the Coast Lines. There agreements were
> different from the Eastern Lines and Western
> Lines. I have a Coast Lines agreement. You would
> be surprised what is in it. I worked on the
> Eastern Lines. I know what you saying.
>
> I have a 1949 Arizona ETT. The line from Needles
> to Barstow, California was part of the Arizona
> Division.
>
> Plus, I have a 1952 Los Angeles ETT. The Needles
> to Barstow became part of the Los Angeles
> Division.
>
> The conductor that filled out the book had rights
> Needles to Barstow and Needles to Seligman
> (freight service) or Winslow in passenger
> service.
>
> I can not figure out why the Arizona name was
> replaced with Albuquerque. The superintendents
> office as well as the dispatchers office remained
> in Winslow.
>
> The conductor had rights since he was working the
> Arizona Division. The agreement does not mention
> that the Needles to Barstow belong to another
> division.
>
> It isn't what it seems to be!

When the Arizona Division was eliminated its three numbered districts were added to the other three Coast Lines Divisions, the AZ 1st District was moved to the Alburqueque Division and became the Kingman District. The AZ 2nd District was moved to the Los Angeles Division and became the Needles District and the AZ 3rd District was moved to the Valley Division and became the Mojave District. This is the reason that into the 1980's, the Kingman, Needles and Mojave Districts didn't have numbered like the rest of the mainline Districts on the Santa Fe.

The answer to this question is very simple. Needles was originally the headquarters terminal for the Arizona Division which was abolished in 1949. Portions of the Old Arizona (as it is known) was divided up among the Valley Division, Los Angeles Division and Albuquerque Division. Where Barstow had previously been the eastern end of the Los Angeles Division, the abolishment necessitated an equity arrangement for Los Angeles Passenger Trainmen and Needles Passenger Trainmen based on mileage. Because there are more miles between Needles and Barstow than Los Angeles and Barstow, if, for example there were three crew turns, two turns belonged to Needles trainmen and one turn to the Los Angeles trainmen. Santa Fe passenger engine crews continued to work LAX to Barstow and Needles to Barstow, (as did freight crews) while passenger trainmen worked LAX-Needles / Needles-LAX.

On the Santa Fe Railway passenger train, the Chief, train nos. 19 and 20 between LA and Needles, CA there were two turns belonged to LA passenger trainmen and one turn belong to Needles passenger trainmen. LA based enginemen worked train nos.20/19 between LA and Barstow every other days. Needles based engine men worked train nos. 19/20 between Needles and Barstow. Trains 19/20, the Chief, was discontinued 50 years ago this coming May 13 and 14.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/18 02:55 by RodneyZona.