Eastern Railroad Discussion > MBTA looking for new commuter line operator

Boston Globe story from Saturday (11-30-02) describes the MBTA's search for a new operator, and the candidates who are in the running. They've really got Guilford pegged in this story, although it's confusing as to why they're even mentioned since they're not in the running. It would be ironic if they were, given the old B&M's lack of interest in passenger operations for the last 50 years!

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/334/metro/Boston_consortium_favored_on_rail_pact+.shtml

Why do you say that Guilford isn't in the running? Apparently Guilford is more in the running than one of the other bidders, whose bid was thrown out due to incomplete info.

Just because Guilford had some issues in the past doesn't mean they couldn't be a good operator today. If their bid is fair and they can prove that they'll run the commuter rail operate safely and efficiently, they should be awarded the contract.

steambrake wrote:

> They've really got Guilford pegged in this story,
> although it's confusing as to why they're even mentioned since
> they're not in the running.

"Why do you say that Guilford isn't in the running?"

Because there were 3 bidders and Guilford wasn't one of them, so I assumed they weren't in the running.
The article states that they've (Guilford) had no communication with labor, and have had labor troubles in the past.

"David Fink, Guilford's executive vice president, declined to be interviewed for this article, saying only, "May the best company win."

Have I misunderstood this somehow?

Actually, MEC407 is right. Guilford Rail Services(GRS) is in the running. I am not sure whitch bidder was thrown out, but the MBTA has said that it must be an American company, whitch de-qualifies another bidder. Right now, it is really looking like GRS is going to get the contract. Also, contrary to popular belief, GRS and the MBTA have a good working relationship, unlike when GRS lost the contract. However, there was some dispute that if GRS gets it, CSX might get the Worcester line, but i have not heard any more on that latley, so CSX may have dropped their objection.

MEC407 wrote:

> Why do you say that Guilford isn't in the running?
> Apparently Guilford is more in the running than one of the
> other bidders, whose bid was thrown out due to incomplete
> info.
>
> Just because Guilford had some issues in the past doesn't
> mean they couldn't be a good operator today. If their bid is
> fair and they can prove that they'll run the commuter rail
> operate safely and efficiently, they should be awarded the
> contract.
>
> steambrake wrote:
>
> > They've really got Guilford pegged in this story,
> > although it's confusing as to why they're even mentioned
> since
> > they're not in the running.
>
> [%sig%]

ST214, from you are saying it sounds like the writer for the globe has the story all wrong.

Last that I saw here in the local media was that GRS will still in it. The upper management may not be the most socialable, but from what I hear from the guys, the rank and file seem to love their jobs.

May not be a bad deal at all.

I do not know if you live in the Boston area or not, but that paper isn't exactly known around here for its accurate reporting. They have been in some hot water in the past due to some of their reporters.

I live in the northeast, and have always read the Globe over the Herald. (You must be referring to the Barnicle incident, which is just a shame).
The Globe has always been my paper, but if this story is as out of whack as you folks say, that's pretty sad.

steambake>

I don't know where that story is from, BUT

The two bidders currently in the running are Guilford and the other company which has been known for shaky commuter service in other areas (the name escapes me).

When a fellow friend and T conductor told me GRS was bidding I did not believe it. Contrary to popular belief the T has a very good working relationship with GTI. From what I hear GTI does one hell of a job dispatching T's on ex-B&M territory. Time will tell who gets it.

I think the reporter might have gotten things mixed up.

There were originally three bidders, and Guilford was one of those three. One bid was recently thrown out due to incomplete insurance information. That leaves two bidders, Guilford and some other company. Part of the "other company" is from abroad (England, perhaps) and I think they've had problems with running a passenger rail operation over there.

Assuming that Guilford's bid is complete, I think they have a very good chance of getting it.

steambrake wrote:


> Because there were 3 bidders and Guilford wasn't one of them,
> so I assumed they weren't in the running.
> The article states that they've (Guilford) had no
> communication with labor, and have had labor troubles in the
> past.

I'm somewhat baffled by this. I've re-read the story and I am amazed at how "pro" Massbay the writer is, and how blatantly negative he is toward Guilford.

"The so-called MassBay conglomerate has become the frontrunner somewhat by default, they said: It has far more experience, money, and worldwide clout to run the nation's fourth largest commuter rail operation than Billerica's Guilford Rail Systems".

And then goes on to quote an anonymous Wall Street railroad analyst as saying,
''If I were in charge of awarding a commuter rail contract, and I wanted a company that could meet the critical scheduling demands that commuters require, I'd stay as far away from Guilford as possible.''

We'll see what happens in the coming weeks.

Not all Guilford bashing is flagrant. Guilford by every means has had a shaky track record, especially in the form if labor disputes.. When the T contract was disbanded in 1986 due to labor problems, not only were the issues with the T, but system wide for Guilford. They were so bad, the entire Delaware and Hudson railway subsidiary of GTI was run into bankruptcy.

I would not judge this company on things that happened 15 years ago when the entire industry was floundering, but you have to keep it mind when giving them such a large responsibility as the T, where many lives are at risk. Thankfully things have greatly improved on Guilford and they have moved themselves into quite the competitive railroad. Personally I think Unions gets too much anyway, but thats for another day : )

It will be interesting to see if they get it, although I don't think it will happen.


RW

The GRS of today is a DIFFERENT railroad than the GRS of 1986. Most of the GRS guys are nice, and the ones i've talked to are happy with their job, and employer. I know a few guys who worked for GRS when the MBTA gave Amtrak the contract, and they went with the MBTA, and only one i have talked to will not go back if GRS gets it.

Rob, if GRS gets it, John will once again work for GRS. I wonder if he ever expected that???

What a bunch of B.S.!!! Let's see... the Downeaster is one of Amtrak's most successful and on-time trains, and who dispatches the Downeaster? GUILFORD!!! What a moron. I can see why he wanted to remain anonymous; it's because he has absolutely nothing to back up his stupid opinion with, and he probably knows that Guilford would take him to court (rightfully so) for saying something as libelous as that.

steambrake wrote:

> And then goes on to quote an anonymous Wall Street railroad
> analyst as saying,
> ''If I were in charge of awarding a commuter rail contract,
> and I wanted a company that could meet the critical scheduling
> demands that commuters require, I'd stay as far away from
> Guilford as possible.''

slr62 wrote:


>
>
> Personally I think Unions gets too much anyway, but thats for
> another day : )
>
>
>
> RW
>
> [%sig%]
I would like to add some input to that discussion, when and if it ever occurs.


Ken
Mason City, IA

Local newsradio station in Boston reported this morning that the Massbay consortium was now the clear frontrunner in the selection process.

That's what they said.