Eastern Railroad Discussion > Illinois governor signs two-person freight train crew bill

On August 9, Governor J.B. Pritzker signed a two-person freight train crew bill into law, joining Colorado
and Nevada.

The law becomes effective January 1, 2020.

But the law could be superceded by Federal law.  Senate Bill 24, or the “Two Person Freight Train Act,” provides that: “no rail carrier shall operate a train or light engine used in connection with the movement of freight unless it has an operating crew consisting of at least 2 individuals. Provides that the minimum freight train crew size shall remain in effect until a federal law or rule encompassing the subject matter has been adopted.”

A copy of the bill can be found at:

http://ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.asp?Name=101-0294
 

All this about 2 man crews which I think should be. What about Amtrak running just 1 person on the head end on long distance trains?

Ed

misty1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> All this about 2 man crews which I think should
> be. What about Amtrak running just 1 person on the
> head end on long distance trains?
>
> Ed

What about Metra?  They probably operate more trains per day than all the freight carriers in Illinois combined, all with one person in the cab.

Dave

DavidP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> misty1 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > All this about 2 man crews which I think should
> > be. What about Amtrak running just 1 person on
> the
> > head end on long distance trains?
> >
> > Ed
>
> What about Metra?  They probably operate more
> trains per day than all the freight carriers in
> Illinois combined, all with one person in the
> cab.

Number of people in the cab =/= number of crew members.

Also, the law specifically applies only to freight trains.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/13/19 20:03 by toledopatch.

GenePoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On August 9, Governor J.B. Pritzker signed a
> two-person freight train crew bill into law,
> joining Colorado
> and Nevada.
>
> The law becomes effective January 1, 2020.
>
> But the law could be superceded by Federal law. 
> Senate Bill 24, or the “Two Person Freight Train
> Act,” provides that: “no rail carrier shall
> operate a train or light engine used in connection
> with the movement of freight unless it has an
> operating crew consisting of at least 2
> individuals. Provides that the minimum freight
> train crew size shall remain in effect until a
> federal law or rule encompassing the subject
> matter has been adopted.”
>
> A copy of the bill can be found at:
>
> http://ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.as
> p?Name=101-0294
>  

This could get interesting since the Indiana Rail Road has been operating with one person crews in Illinois for decades.

I live in Illinois and the state government is nuts. People are fleeing the state.  

This is Illinois. Private ccompanies have to pay and obey but the government has its own rules. The government would have to pay for METRA and Amrtak state funded trains if the rule included them. Our politicians are good at telling other people what to do while exempting themselves.

Bruce Stikkers
St. Joseph, IL

Nothing in the language says the two must be in the locomotive cab.
As for Metra and Amtrak, there are already at least two crew persons aboard every train. They're just not all in the locomotive cab. 

I'm surprised nobody has commented on the language that bans blocking any crossing for more than ten minutes.  That could cause a lot of mischief in Chicagoland.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm surprised nobody has commented on the language
> that bans blocking any crossing for more than ten
> minutes.  That could cause a lot of mischief in
> Chicagoland.

The Supreme Court has already decided that is DOA.

DevalDragon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I'm surprised nobody has commented on the
> language
> > that bans blocking any crossing for more than
> ten
> > minutes.  That could cause a lot of mischief
> in
> > Chicagoland.
>
> The Supreme Court has already decided that is DOA.

More feel-good legislation, no benefit except to the !awyers ?

Posted from Android

Federal district courts have thrown out local crossing blockage ordinances but; the Supreme Court has not heard any of these yet and likely won’t unless there is disagreement between the various district courts.

District courts have tossed these claiming Federal pre-emption. I suspect only Congress can create a crossing blockage law that can hold up.

Posted from iPhone

Was it Virginia that once had "caboose laws" in the 1980's. How was that done away with ?

Oregon, Montana, Nebraska, and Virginia had the caboose laws in the 80s. I believe that the Virginia House repealed their caboose law.

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm surprised nobody has commented on the language
> that bans blocking any crossing for more than ten
> minutes.  That could cause a lot of mischief in
> Chicagoland.

Blue Island, a south suburb, has had that ordinance for decades.  CSX was the culprit.  If the engineer got a ticket, he just gave it to the yardmaster at Barr Yard.   The railroad just viewed as the cost of doing business.

Still a two (or more) person crew with conductor(s) on the rear.And they routinely call signals, at least while on CSX.

Have the carriers done nothing on this? Or will they just wait until it takes effect and go to Cour’s then?

Posted from iPhone

A federal preemption already exists:

https://www.railwayage.com/regulatory/fra-cancels-crew-size-nprm/

GMRNE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A federal preemption already exists:
>
> https://www.railwayage.com/regulatory/fra-cancels-
> crew-size-nprm/

Batory saying he believes FRA policy, without a CFR, automatically preempts state law, and the laws actually being preempted, are two different things. Look for the FRA interpretation to be challenged in court.

As far as blocked crossings go, I'm surprised none of the motor carriers have gotten involved, claiming their ability to engage in interstate commerce is being impeded by the railroads. They might be able to argue in court, that when the RR grants an easement for a public road crossing, it is assumed or implied that said roadway will be used for interstate commerce.

Posted from Android

The FRA needs an explicit "the government shall not require a minimum number of crew per train" rule to clarify the matter.
Technically anything that is not covered by Federal law is left to the states. By not having a minimum number of crew rule, they are leaving it to the states.

Isn't the issue of deferral to the regulatory agency a point of current contention with the Trump administration?

If the agency over reaches and makes rules not specifically rooted in case law or the CFR, the court is supposed to slap them down.

Posted from Android