Join the discussion on the following article:
STB says railroads can prioritize freight over passengers in certain cases
“Statue”?
Charles, is that your only complaint? That a word was misspelled. Nothing about the STB’s ignorance about said statute issued by the US Congress, giving passenger trains absolute preference over freight trains? After all Amtrak was formed to relieve railroads from the responsibility of operating passenger trains.
Seems to me that an administrative agency can interpret statutory enactments and issue regulations accordingly, but it can’t become an unelected legislature and make its own law, in contravention of Congress. Seems to me a court would so rule. But, today, who knows?
Hmmmm…Will the same hold true for air passengers and their recently established “tarmac bill of rights?” This is a bad idea plain and simple. A passenger train is a scheduled, nimble and a short entity to dispatch. In this day of technology you’d think the passenger train would raise the bar for the freight train!
If one takes the time to read what the STB said, it makes a lot of sense. The ruling is taking an over all position on the total train dispatching effort - not just one example. “Railroads would no longer have to give passenger trains the right-of-way in every situation, so long as they made efforts to reduce the collective delays a train experiences on its entire journey.”
I’ll give you one example that still sticks in my memory. Conrail Youngstown Division in the late 1970’s. Conrail is making a big effort to get the main lines back up to standards which results in stretches of track out of service continuously (Monday to Thursday). The Fort Wayne Line in Pennsylvania and eastern Ohio does not enjoy today’s present double track reverse signal system. It’s ABS with the current of traffic (Conrail numbers the track per the PRR’s system of south to north so No. 2 is the Westbound main and No. 1 is the Eastbound main). Manual Block rules apply for movements against the current of traffic with no following moves allowed. This section has few interlocking so reverse movements around track out of service for maintenance is through temporarily manned stations, train orders, and hand operated No. 10 switches. There are no passing siding between Alliance, Ohio and Homewood, Pennsylvania so your only option to sort trains out is if the other main is unoccupied.
At one location, the westbound No. 2 main is out of service continuously for the week for a desperately needed welded rail project. To clear the M of W production gang up at the end of every day and restarting the next day will only delay the installation of the new rail. Plus, trains can only go 10 MPH over the newly worked track until a certain amount of tonnage is operated over the new rail. Every westbound must go against the current of traffic on the No. 1 track under manual block rules - no following trains allowed until the first westbound is completely clear of No. 1 track and back with the cu
Just park the pax train, for any reason. May have snow storm on July 4 in Southern California.
Mr. Robbins presents an interesting, but lengthy, example. My thought is a situation where Amtrak is behind schedule due to its own equipment breaking down. This could interfere with priority freight traffic which I believe should have the right of way in such an instance. However, if Amtrak is behind schedule due to slow orders, broken rails, drag freights or other situations where the hose railroad is the culprit, then Amtrak should have the right of way since it would be trying to gain some time. If I read the STB ruling correctly, it would allow for such an interpretation.
One must keep in mind the original deal: RR’s could dump all passenger service in exchange for providing the new entity priority. Anecdotes and all sorts of interesting stories change nothing. Stuff happens and there are too many incidents of dispatcher mischief to think that this rule can only make the problem worse.
Here is an example: years ago at the old Milw. Rd. Pig’s Eye yard, where the CB&Q and Milwaukee had joint trackage, I watched the eastbound Empire Builder wait for a good 35-40 minutes for a BNSF freight to crawl over the crossover. The reverse, and common sense dispatching would have had the Builder scoot over in a couple of minutes, especially since the freight was nowhere in sight before the Builder showed up.
Watching that scenario only confirmed BNSF’s utter contempt of Amtrak.
The irony is that, bereft of passenger losses, today’s mega-systems are rolling in dough. Who can blame them for never wanting anything to do with passenger service? And for a dismissive attitude toward Amtrak.
Time was when great passenger service was the hallmark of a great RR. The Tourquise Room anyone?
Not only were the railroads relieved of an enormous cost burden as a result of the formation of Amtrak, but many railroads in particular BNSF have benefitted from Federal and State Government funds to improve the capacity and quality of key routes and corridors that are intended to not only benefit Amtrak but also the host railroad. BNSF is a case in point on the Empire Builder Route in particular. It was funded for a not insignificant upgrade of portions of that route which was at the time of the investment not a priority route for BNSF as I understood it. With the boom in oil traffic and other business that subsequently flowed BNSF was able to enjoy the benefit of that upgraded infrastructure to expand operations on the route for its operational and financial benefit. What did Amtrak get?? Nothing except appalling treatment for the Builder at 1 service in each direction in a 24 hour period. I am and have been in Australian and overseas railroad operations for 43 years and I have been through this exercise countless times. Good dispatchers can manage passenger trains on otherwise all freight railroads. The operating regime I manage requires the passenger operator to present their train within 5 minutes of schedule in order for it to be accepted by the host railroad and then for the host railroad to keep that train to within 15 minutes of its schedule through its journey. I totally agree it is absolutely essential that Amtrak comes to the party in being extremely disciplined for its part and in that regard in our arrangement the passenger operator is financially penalized if they don’t perform. So yes its a 2 way thing but even so the overarching part of the Access Agreement mandates the passenger service will have absolute priority.
Of course the AAR “has applauded their this idea.” It has the AAR’s fingerprints all over it.
Mr. Vellacott makes it sound like the govt did the railroads a great favor by allowing them to dispense with that “enormous cost burden” with the formation of Amtrak. The only reason the railroads had that “enormous cost burden” was because the govt made a law that said railroads had to provide passenger service.
If we were in a true market economy back then, the railroads probably would have dispensed with all or most passenger service already. So let’s not act like the govt was doing the railroads a favor - they were already forcing railroads to spend money on a losing service.
The govt is still taking from the railroads. Instead of forcing them to provide passenger service, they are forcing them to host Amtrak. Either way, the govt is forcing the railroads to spend money on something that isn’t the most economic use of resources.
All very true Mr. Dickey. And not only are they forced to host Amtrak, they are not being paid the true cost of providing this service in most cases. I hate to agree with the government on anything but in this case the STB has it right. In those situations where it is warranted, the freights should have the right of way. And those dispatchers that play games, well- they should be disciplined.