CN is still dealing with the changes made in the 1920’a when it was converted to government from several private bankrupt lines like GTR, GTP, CNoR, National Continantal*, Inter Colonial. CN was rationalized out of these companys.* If I remember right CNR was already a very efficient operating tatio by the 1980’s if you discounted a few lines like, Newfoundland narrow gage, PEI, Montreal comuter lines and prairy branch lines, wich they don;t have to account for now anyways. CNR had the lowest grades for a transcontinental railway in North America, this matters if the transcontinental trains are the most profitable. This takes away from Hunter’s credit but…
Maybe Hunter is just in the right place at the right time and his efforts just improve the bottum line . What about Teleir ? CN worked well for him too. Thornton’s consolidations at that time are still the base on CN across canada.
Maybe what jeaton is saying is the “good ole’ boy” network often works with more effect and more in favor to the shipper than a complaint up the offical chain of command.
Quite offten, if it is a “one day fix” type of defect, a call or word to assistant roadmaster or to his assistant, maybe over lunch, often results in the problem being handled promptly.
Keep in mind that no matter what the road, or class of road it is, MOW resources are often thin, because major capital projects are planned 2 or 3 years in advance…it is the “emergency” repairs that throw a wrench into the works.
Not to say most roads don’t have a contengincy plan for such things, but personal experience has shown me that if you start with the guys who actually swing the spike maul so to speak, you can get a lot of defects fixed quite quickly.
If it is a major problem, say a frog or switch need to be replaced, a call to your assistant roadmaster buddy will most likely get the problem on the A sheet faster than a call to superintendent…and a demanding call or letter to the super will almost always get the switch leading into your plant spiked for a good while, because offically the MOW guys always, always have a long long list of higher priority things that “have” to get done, or should have been done yesterday.
And the reverse works too…if I am working a plant, and come across a defect that merits attention right now, I normaly don’t call our trainmaster or roadmaster…I usualy go find the guy in the plant responsible for the track…they may have a private contractor that does their repair or they may do their own work…when I find him, I take him out, show him the problem, and hopefully we find a way to work around it for that day.
If we have to highball the plant, I am now in a position to
You describe exactly the kind of extra effort that keeps things flowing. It is good business, but it is extra work and it deserves appreciation. So how inclined would you be to make the extra effort if the plant traffic manager had a hissy fit and called the superintendent every time something delayed the switch job and the engine showed up a little late?
Paul, that train is a dangerous combination due to the fact that there was only one freight car to one locomotive, and worse that one freight car exceeded 100 tons per operative brake system. Look at BNSF or UP’s ETT covering operation of such a train on a similar grade like Cima Hill on the UP or Cajon on BNSF. There is no margin for error in the train handling, the safe course would have been to bring along 4 or 5 empty freight cars for extra braking effort. As for being safely done in the Steam Era, no trains in that era had freight cars approaching that weight on four axles, retainers would have been used without question, and the rules would have specifed that the train had to have added empty freight cars for additional braking effort.
Agreed. In fact, they never do in my way of thinking…not when dealing with humans. I am a proponent of Kantian ethics and morality, so utilitarian reasoning is fraught with defects in my view. Utilitarianism is what allows us to default to “majority rules” at the expense of one or more, as long as they are in a minority.
But to supplant moral courage and reasoning with the politics of envy is not effective. That was my point in your quote of me earlier.
I would put forth all the extra effort needed to make sure I found every single item that could be considered a defect…from lose joint bars or a sloppy switch to a frog with a chipped nose to debris in the toe path…and I would try my best to see if we could arrange it so that is the very last plant we work on our shift…
And then work the plant as slow as possible.
On the other hand, if the plant manager or transportation manager met me at the gate, and explained he has a serious need to receive his inbounds by 8 am because of a new shift rotation in his workforce, or some tooling set up that has to be done early…or he simply points out that we are a little later than expected, and he would like to know why so he can cover his fanny to his boss, then odds are I would go out of my way to see if there is a way to work his plant first or second, and I would make sure that information was forwarded along to the trainmaster or yardmaster in a manner that wouldn’t ruffle any feathers.
For most local and switch crews, being on time or working a plant in the most efficient manner is actually a source of pride, and we do take pride in our work, because for us, this is the grass roots of railroading, this is where it all begins, spotting and pulling cars out the industries.
If it is one of those plants where you make a call as your running around your spot cars, and by the time you get shoved down to the plant gates, the gates are open and someone is there with the outbound list and your all lined up for the inbound track…well, when guys like that ask for a favor, say they need a car moved from a back track to a loadout rack because their in house switcher is broken or their track mobile is buried, then we normally take care of it for them without a fuss.
The flip side of this is if it is one of those plants where y
Its interesting to see and read the different views in the way some people think of CN and Mr.Harrison.Have anyone of you ever read Mr.Harrison’s book on the CN? Its called “How We Work and Why”,the other is, “The Pig that Flew”, by Harry Bruce. I recommend you read them both.Then you might just realize and understand what is going on.I respect Mr.Harrison,and I wouldnt mind shaking his hand, and asking for his autograph,to be put in my book he wrote.What Mr.Harrison has done to CN and the other railroads merged into it,was for many reasons.Any of you feel that you could run CN any better,even in todays economic status?I sure would like to see you try.Granted I have heard ALOT of complaining from both sides of the fence on CN …more than anyone will ever know.The biggest problem with CN and the other railroads is lack of people,and in some cases, its sad,but some people that just dont really care.Some, if not most of us work 8 -10 hour shifts.These CN workers put in 12 very long, and tiring hours…then are suppose to have the remaining time off, till they are called for their next job assignment.It doesnt work that way at times.I’ve seen CN people work 7 days straight with out a break,due to some other worker,not showing up for their shift,lack of a worker(s),or someone not qualified to do the job at hand.Yet what is ironic is that,yes they complain about the work they do,or cars that should be sent elsewhere,that are being returned back to the originating yard due to no capacity at the other yard.In some cases these rail cars sit in a siding for days on end.Then there are trains "Dead On the Law ",and in sidings due to NO qualified engineers,or conductors,to operate them,or in other cases,air lines frozen in long trains in winter,yard masters that have a hard time, where to put freight cars, in a congested yard,a locomotive running out of fuel,or a mechanical problem that was unavoidable.Then theres the locomotives that are generally not working properly themselves,o
Minor correction - The Pig That Flew has nothing to do with Mr. Harrison, as it pre-dates IC’s and hence his appearance on CN by several years. Instead, it is mainly about CN CEO Paul Tellier and the mid-1990s privatization of CN.
I do believe that Mr. Harrison has written a 2nd book, with a similar title, but I’m having trouble finding that title or other reference quickly. It’s probably in this month’s Trains article, but that issue is at home today . . .
On the EJ&E, CN overcharged USS to the point where USS had enough with CN. USS now relies on IHB for switching instead of CN. They also stalled on the hill out of Joliet twice in a week because of underpowering trains and started brush fires in Crest Hill and Plainfield.
I think we have the TRAINS magazine, and many other journals, to thank for the lack of respect for the period. Lots of white space around the border, and sometimes borders within borders, but no space after a period.
Being an amateur type setter, I always used an em quad at the end of a sentence and an en quard after a comma. Nowadays, with my eyesight on the wane, I have to read every other sentence twice as they seem to be run-ons, like many of the posts here. I think the paragraph should be re-instated.
But lack of respect is the essence of this epoch. Crossing gates, customers, you name it are in Rodney Dangerfield’s camp: “I don’t get no respect.”
Responsibility can’t be parsed. The man at the top owns the successes and the failures equally.
I have a lot more respect for the man who takes $1 and builds it into $1.1 million than the man who takes $1 million and builds it into $1.1 million. Before we giddily celebrate success of a man, I think we would want to carefully analyze what the man was given for bank when he started.
Railways are a long-term business. The measure of a railway man may not be known even during his lifetime. Some leaders have seemed pretty good during their time but when we look back a decade or two later, we can see their success was impermanent and their policies petty. I can look back into my career and see lasting value created by men such as Kenefick, Holtman, Krebs, Jenks, Walsh, Crane, Claytor, and see value destroyed by some others. Some of our leaders we have good regard for today will still be remembered positively a quarter-century from now, some will have been forgotten, and some will be deeply regretted.
Positive press during a railway man’s career is a poor guide to true value. The example is Stuart Saunders, Railroader of the Year twice, whose irresponsibility and failure to make the tough choices nearly destroyed the industry. Contemporaneously, Downing Jenks, never a darling of the press, never a Railroader of the Year, did more to regenerate railroading than any man of his era through his insistence on management training and an iron-clad insistence that everyone was personally responsible for everything they touched. The Jenks culture was the framework on which the rebirth of railroading occurred after 1980.
Well having served in the military. It is not unusual that 30-40% of the people under a strong leader will dislike the leader in one way or another. It’s very rare that you have broad popular support across the board. Popularity is NOT how you measure Leadership in the military or the civilian business world. You measure effective leadership by how many subordinates follow you and help you meet your goals. You never measure it on public complaining. subordinates will complain BUT they will still follow you if your a good leader and they respect you. So the complaining is really not a measure of anything. Thats probably why Hunter Harrison, if he is smart, disregards the complaining. If the complaining is serious then a good leader will spot it via the Organization starting to miss some goals and/or a legitimate morale problem developing.
On the complaining topic:
I rode the VIA Rail Skeena about 5 years ago and the entire crew was ripping on Hunter Harrison. They alleged…He was ripping up their good rail so that it could be shipped South and used in the United States, he was making work rule changes that imperiled safety, he wasn’t listening to long-time “Canadian” employees, etc. Most of the crew was from points in Eastern Canada. Not sure why they were so far West.
Anyhow, I pointed out to them that the CN was a basket case financially before Hunter Harrison took over. Also, said that if Canadians were so great at running any business why were there Americans in or very near the top spot of most of their transportation companies, Airlines and Otherwise (silence). CN had the opportunity to hire a Canadian for the top spot but choose an American South of the Border for a reason.
The brush fires have nothing to do with the CN taking over the J. They were started with ex J SD38s, and the J was know for doing the same thing along that strech. Also as an employee for a class one in Chicago, I can tell you that all of our traffic for USS gets handed off to the CN, and not the Harbor.
Long before the business itself is gone, as soon as there is a leadership change everything changes. Many businesses or thier products rarely last a generation if that long. At least not in the same form as when first started.
I think Hunter’s success is living off of Telier’s, the CEO prior to H. And Thornton from as long ago as the 1920’s still has a strong effect on CN today. Just look at the connecting line from Longlac to Nakina. This conection makes the CN physicaly a cost effective railroad to run over a long time.
Oh there’s no doubt that legacy goes a long way. Especially if you did everything totally right or totally wrong! If it is right, then the next leader can just manage and build on and off of what you did. If it is wrong, then what you did has to be eliminated or drastically change. OR maybe you were a good operations person and now the joint needs some acquisitions or be merged or sold off and so one expert in that field is brought in. In this case, meeting the age limit, it is a forced change and depending upon the disposition of the selection of the new leader, there might be a caretaker of the status quo, a fighter to continue the legacy, or a fighter that goes in a completely different direction with our without the board and stockholders wonts. Then there are factors such as the market place, the economy, the competition or competitors, and politics, to name a few things that can change things anyway!