That is good news for the present but I believe sooner or later the railroads will win on this issue. Twenty years from now 1-man crews may be the norm. The technology may advance where it is possible. As long as the train encounters no mechanical issues a one man crew is ok. However, just let it go into emergency out in the middle of no where and no road close by.
The link to the article is just a tidbit of the story. I am not going to register just to read this one story. Many other people will also not register just for one story.
It would be nice to have the whole article to be able to read it.
i am a retired railroad conductor ( road conductor) back in the late sixties there was a full crew law in the state of indiana that there had to be five men, the engineer , the fireman the head man and third man, and at the rear was the conductor and the rear brakeman or rear flagman. that is all gone now thanks to the union and the government. before i retired there was the engineer and the conductor. no matter if the railroad have the technology that one man crew is safew,it is not whgat happens if the engineer has a heart attack will the on board system stop the train, or say if the train goes into emergency, say a broken drawbar or knuckle that has happened. so a two man crew is safer than one man crew. thank you
Just out of curiousity, what was a fireman’s duties on a diesel locomotive?
And for that matter, what was a brakeman’s job (after the airbrake system was universal)?
Oh, I coun’t agree more. But like you stated, the power of the unions has been eroding for years. Many union people are not happy that the unions are not doing more to fight for pay, insurance costs, and other issues. We have very good insurance, but mine just incresed about 35 bucks a month.
I think that the might dollar will win for the railroads and we all know that the railroads can definately throw around some money. It seems like the current administration’s logo is “Show Me the Money.” Sonner or later, they will win on this issue. I am not for it, but that will not stop the railroads from doing it. Few people like the RC locos but the railroads are doing it. Many cities have passed legislation against the use of RC locos (mine included) but since the railroads are Federally chartered the cities have no control. Sometimes a railroad will cooperate with a city in a noise issue such as not blowing the horn during certain hours or days but it is a voluntary thing.
The railroads will keep plugging away at this issue and someday will win. Just how long it takes is anybody’s guess. The fact that we don’t like it will not matter to Washington DC. We don’t have the money to pass under the table like the railroads do. This is just a minor setback now, the railroads will not give up on this issue. They may let it cool for a while, but they will not be giving up.
The fireman’s job was to keep the sparkplugs clean so the gas was all used.
Seriously,
The job of the fireman was to learn how to be an engineer. Why do you think we have these 60-day wonders running signals and derailing trains (such as the 2 incidents on Metra in the last year or so). There is so much to learn about operating a train that only experience can teach you.
The brakemans job was (is) to do the ‘dirty work’ like crawling under a car that has sticky brakes so they can loosen the brake rigging, or to carry the knuckle the engineer just broke, or sweeping switches during snow, walking the train checking the brakes after a set-out or a pick-up. Now the conductor has to do all that fun stuff.
The railroads play the odds with crew size, just like they do with other safety concerns. They examine how much it would cost to implement a resolutiuon to a safety issue, versus the cost if they do nothing and hope nothing ever happens. Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose (see above). I’m sure that would be comforting to the survivors of the “accidents” that have claimed lives, knowing that their loved one was killed because the railroad (or any company for that matter) decided the potential for death was not worth spending some of their profits to address the issue…
all i have to say is it dont matter. most all the conductors i have get on the engine and go to sleep. i have been working on my rest with no days off . i have nodded off running and have stood up and run the train to stay awake. while the conductor is sleeping. i look at it this way im not the baby sitter if they cant stay awake and do thier job or wake up and fight for thier job then let them do away with it. its dangerouse out there now with the fatige . it aint going to get any better soon
Thank god.
I say crew em up. The payroll is still cheaper than the lost productivity, time, effort of additional resources and blocked mainlines because of a simple busted coupler or whatever that requires several people to fix it.
What I would like to see is accidents due to falling asleep with one man crews. You gotta have folks with ya to stay awake.
Try my solution:
Wait until the conductor is sound asleep, and you’re drifting along in the 3rd or 4th notch. Quietly pick up the wrench, slowly unlatch the rear door so you can get out fast, then hold down the independent bail-off for about thirty seconds.
Then, when the time is right, very quickly and in sequence first toss the wrench so it makes a big noise when it lands, then immediately or at the same time release the independent, open the back door and run out yelling and/or swearing like you’re about to hit something. I can almost guarantee the conductor will be awake most of the rest of the trip.
The one man crew is going to happen. It’s just a matter of time because the technology is available today. As someone working in MoW I don’t see a one man crew as being much more unsafe than two men. Two man crews blow through 10 mph slow orders now. I’m not going to feel much more unsafe with a one man crew.
I am sorry to say that 1 Man Operating Crews will be come a regular occurance on Freight Trains very soon but on Commuter Trains and Passenger trains No it won’t happen.
You think they would be worried about terrorism! Who knows who’s in the enigne when the only crewmember is at the back of the train fixing the F.R.E.D.!
If I understand you right, then…The Dead mans pedal will stop the train if he has a heart attack.
Metra and Amtrak began using one-man engine crews many years ago. If the dispatcher has to transmit a restricting order to the train, the engineer must stop the train before he can copy the order.
However, like many of you, I totally disagree with the idea to have only one person in the cab. Of ANY train.
I could tell you about many dozens of situations I was in while working for Metra where the second person in the cab helped prevent an accident. Now the lone person in the cab must rely on luck. And like I mentioned in my post above, for some Metra trains, their luck had run out. I bet it will not be the last time we hear of an incident where a second person in the cab would have made the difference preventing a serious accident. I’m not saying a second person in the cab will prevent every accident; what I am saying is the second person drastically reduces the odds of an accident.
I wonder how many years of wages the lawsuits would have paid for from the Metra trains that derailed going throught the crossovers too fast and derailing. And that’s just the money part of it. In one of those accidents, two people died. How much in saved wages are those lives worth? How much are the future victims lives worth?
Published Saturday
March 11, 2006
Railroads dealt setback in bid for 1-person crew
BY STACIE HAMEL
WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER
A judge ruled Friday that a union has no obligation to take part in national bargaining with railroads over the size of train crews, apparently thwarting carriers’ immediate hopes of implementing one-person crews.
The carriers affected include the Omaha-based Union Pacific Railroad and BNSF Railway Co., which also operates in Nebraska and Iowa.
The lawsuit was filed in March 2005 by the United Transportation Union, which represents mostly conductors, against railroads represented in negotiations by the National Carriers’ Conference Committee.
The UTU has been in negotiation with the carriers since Jan. 1, 2005, over rates of pay and working conditions.
A union spokesman called the ruling a significant victory. National Carriers’ Conference Committee representatives were not immediately available.
The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge G. Patrick Murphy of Southern Illinois also rebuffed railroads’ request that the union join in proposing that Congress repeal or change the Federal Employer Liability Act, which allows injured railroad workers to sue carriers for on-the-job injuries.
The agreements over crew size - known as crew consist agreements - were negotiated railroad-by-railroad, rather than through national bargaining, and require at least one conductor and, in some cases, a brakeman on all through freight trains.
In his order, Murphy wrote, “UTU has no obligation to bargain with Defendant Carriers in national handling regarding the crew consist issues . . . the subject is local as a matter of law.”
He wrote, however, that national bargaining is appropriate on a wage-reduction proposal once crew consist has been resolved at the local level.
On the proposal regarding the Federal
Jim, and others wanting the whole story:
http://www.utu.org/worksite/detail_news.cfm?ArticleID=26874
Don’t be put off by the fact that it comes from the UTU’s website–I’ve always thought that their “editing” was nonexistent, and the articles are quoted verbatim.
One man crews are coming, I’m sure, but I don’t expect to see it. They won’t get it this year or next but it’s coming. I agree with the other railroaders on here, I don’t have any desire to be out there alone, not that every conductor is the most alert individual, but it totally spooks me out thinking about running a train for about 200 miles all by myself.
Zardoz, I like your “wake up” story but its only a temporary fix. The notorious ones usually stay that way.
As for firemen, Gates, Zardoz’es comments are right on the money, I, too, attribute many of the recent troubles to engineers that were made engineers way too soon, without seasoning.
…As a rail fan, not a railroader…I wonder how the desire to go to a one man crew by the company measures against saving a certain amount of money up against certain safety features a two man crew must bring to the table on the average…I hear some of the posters saying the 2nd man is no help, but surely, overall there must be some help from most of the 2nd man being present in safety and help when problems do arise…I find it difficult to understand the Co. needing to remove that one salary from the thousands of dollars of income from a current freight train loadings. As I stated, I’m not a railroader and there must be reasons I don’t see…
Well not to brew any bad sentiment, but paying a guy full scale to basically sit around as a student is somewhat pork barrelish, isn’t it? Especially when you look at the time frame involved, when the RR’s were having the trucking industry carve their own lunch right out of the RR’s rib meat…etc. Costs had to be trimmed somewhere.
And, just playing devil’s advocate, if there is ample spare time on todays 2 man crews that conductors sleeping on the job is the widespread sin that everybody knows about but no one will admit to…then put yourself in the employer’s position and imagine how they would feel paying for 3 man crews. let alone 5 man crews.
Tell ya what I think, it may take 10 years, and it might take 30 years, but I suspect NO MAN CREWS will become the eventual norm.
Automation at the industrial level is very robust already. And if one thinks that “safety” is the best argument for keeping a human in the cab, all I can say is think about all the grade level accidents where the engineer says "I threw the train into emergency, which was all I could do. The amount of train I had behind me required 4000 feet to stop, but unfortunately I only had 1500 feet between me and the car sitting in front of me… …cause that is what the railroad hears time and again, … Proximity sensors on engines and photo sensors at grade crossings could today make the decision to throw the train into emergency equally well to a human,…plus an automated crew won’t die on hours and require rescue and replacement via the taxi, won’t require a motel bill at “away” terminals, and won’t close their eyes to “rest” them while on duty.
It’s inevitable I’d say.
Antigates,
I must respectfully disagree.
First issue. When you began your job, did not someone sit with you for a while to teach you. And if not in your particular case, ask around, you will likely discover most everyone had a training period. And if it was your wife, mother, kid, whatever, that was saved by that second person, would you not agree that it was worth it?
Second issue. I do agree about the 3 and 5 man crews. But remember, it was not too many years ago that those “extra” men’s jobs were to flag opposing trains in the event of a delay of derailment. Trains used to be operated by train orders, even in dark territory. The only assurance of a clear track was the authority granted by train order or timetable, and if there was a delayed train in front of him, an engineer would not know about it until it was visible, which in most cases was way, way too late. The men would walk ahead or behind the train with fusees (flares) and torpedoes to warn advancing trains. Radios, when they became manditory, alieviated the need for flagmen.
Third issue. Your faith in automation shows either a lack of understanding of what it is like to be in a cab of an operating locomotive, and/or the physics of train handling. Ther’s more to stopping a train than “throwing it into emergency”. In addition, if AI ever gets smart enough to do what you suggest, there will be very few humans with jobs.
And all of those fancy sensors and cameras? Just imagine how much the kids will have playing “chicken” with the trains. Just step in front for a second, and the train stops! Wow! Such fun! And while their at it, maybe they can help themselves to some of the goodies in the trailers and boxcars.
Every time a car runs around the gates, the computer puts the train in emergency, and the community is blocked waiting for the train to restart. And who will walk the train to ensure it did not derail when it went into emergency?
Fourth issue.
Firemen were engineers in training.
Brakemen, both head end and rear end were there to throw switches, protect back up moves…tie down cuts of cars…
With the advent of the FRED or EOT, the caboose, which is the conductors office, went away and he moved to the cab.
You had a head end brakeman to line switches for forward moves…You dont want the engineer to leave the cab to line a switch…the rules that allow that are out of this world.
Rear brake man and conductor handles the reverse moves.
Ed