Key word in bold.
If a locomotive burns up, the natives don’t come out and shoot you! I also think that the liability issues are a bit different, as in the military not coming home is an acceptable outcome.
But I saw the 5 or 10 minute video on fire extinguisher operation that’s shown during rules classes.
Jeff
I’m aligned with the cops. If you think it is necessary use your gun and answer to your superiors later.
If you saw a video, then you are good to go!
I never knew how to walk until they showed me the video. High tech stuff.
Well, that “archaic” piece of law will get you a bigger settlement if you get injured than workers’ comp will. That’s why there are law firms that deal with only FELA. If I get injured through no real fault of my own, but due to the company’s negligence in maintaining the property, equipment, etc., I’d rather have a hefty settlement than a paltry sum, thank you very much. If you don’t believe me, talk to one of the firms. I’m not that much more fond of lawyers than I am of management, but at least I know who’s going to be on my side.
People who complain about safety rules are usual tend to be the types who find them “constricting.” In other words, “dangerous” is their middle name, and odds are we’re better off without them.
If you’re in the Navy, you better know how to save your “home…” Your nearest neighbor may be miles and miles away, and there may well be things in the water which value you for your caloric value.
And just like the ERG ‘orange book’ is only good for the first 10 minutes of a hazmat incident, a 2.5 Lb fire extinguisher is only good for the little stuff. I’m not sure I’d want to stand on top of several thousand gallons of fuel oil dealing with a spitting on a bonfire. And I am a trained firefighter.
It’s said that the rules in the rulebook are written in blood. There are all too many people willing to ignore that piece of wisdom since they know that they know how to do it safely, rules be darned. Hated though they are, weed weasels exist to make sure we don’t get overconfident. One seemingly (at the time) insignificant mistake can get very costly very quickly.
The rulebooks today are nothing more than an exercise in trying to replace common sense with words. Some people just have no business being around large machines. Unfortunately, that’s why half the rules exist. [#dots]
21st Century Rule Books, both Safety and Operating, seem to be written more by lawyers trying to play ‘gotcha’ with the employees than by railroaders trying to operate at safe and efficient railroad.
Remember, Trainmasters are the bottom level of company official supervision. They are REQUIRED to perform X number of efficiency tests monthly and submit the results of those tests. Performing 30 efficiency tests a month (number from the air) and having no failures is not viewed by Senior levels of management as being ‘realistic’.
With the injury pyramid as the model, Senior Management has ‘hard facts’ on the number of injuries and Major Rule Violations…their thinking is…If we have had X Injuries/MRV’s then we MUST have had Y failures of subordinate rules to reach the top of the pyramid. Why haven’t our Trainmasters uncovered this ‘pattern’ of rule violations in their efficiency tests? Let’s apply more pressure to the Trainmaster’s to find failures in their efficiency tests.
I’ve heard the stories of eggs but have never seen them used. The stories always came from another terminal, one place always mentioned was a city bordering on Lake Erie, draw your own conclusions and yet, it goes back to before the Conrail split.
As for weed weasels, oh, the things I’d like to say but hesitate to, usually the rules being interpeted are being interpeted increasingly by some low-level official who spent little or no time doing the actual job they are supervising. That’s my opinion, based on long years of observation and participation from a T&E standpoint
This is one major problem. Ask ten Trainmonsters what a rule means, and you’ll get ten different interpretations, of at odds with each other. The street hired ones often have bizarre interpretations that leave you going If I do it that way, I’ll be breaking six other rules [%-)].
Also, rule may not be applied equally across a system. We have a certain type of PPE that always must be carried on a certain division; only needed under certain conditions on my division; and flat out banned on others.
**
This is the other. Trainmonsters are required to preform a certain number of E-tests every month, and are expected to have a certain percentage of failures. So Trainmonsters “find” failures. Even though something like 90% of failures resulting in investigations are later overturned.
Nick
"As for weed weasels, oh, the things I’d like to say but hesitate to, usually the rules being interpreted are being interpreted increasingly by some low-level official who spent little or no time doing the actual job they are supervising. " That does indeed happen with some ‘college wonders’. They graduate, then wonder what is happening.
I am friends with a track foreman of many years experience who recently got a new track supervisor. I asked if the super had any experience, The answer I got was ‘No, but he’s making a sincere effort to learn’.
Seems to me that at least some of the supervisors do make a serious effort to work with those they supervise and keep things running smoothly while they learn the tricks of the trade.
Disclaimer: I’ve not had any contact with YM’s or RFE’s.
The battle of wits between train-crew and TrainMaster goes way back. Recommending reading Charles F. Steffes’ “Life and Times of a Locomotive Engineer” (ISBN # 1-880365-13-8, Old World Publishers, 1992.) Charles was fire-craker of an engineer from 1942 to 1976 on the Souther Pacific and he documents many a battle with the TrainMaster trying their best to trip crews up.
From an outsider looking in with an MBA and 28 years in the IT project experience, this 1800 era thinking of a TrainMaster cooking up ways to test crew behavior would have been replaced with more modern methods of labor management. I don’t ever recall reading about United Airlines or Delta management flying a plan for a “near miss” to test pilot reaction or seeing an FAA inspector pull a rules book inspection while passengers are boarding the plane. There are better ways of testing then to put several millions of dollars worth of equipment at risk by jumping out of a bush with a lite flare on a downgrade curve and expecting the whole thing to stop right there.
Be interesting to read what comes of your post.
Rule enforcement-the big yellow wrench
The purpose of Efficiency Testing is not to trip up crews. The purpose is to gain rules compliance. On line of road, the most frequently performed test is the so call ‘Banner Test’. The train being tested is given verbal permission by the Dispatcher to enter the appropriate track under rules that require operating the train at Restricted Speed, which on my carrier is a speed that will permit stopping the train within 1/2 the range of vision, not exceeding 15 MPH. The Trainmaster sets up his ‘Banner’ (which is a device that can be readily seen and will do no damage to the train) across the track and waits…If the train hits the ‘Banner’ test is failed. If the train stops prior to the ‘Banner’ the test is passed.
Our division has had several accidents caused by trains operating under Restricted Speed striking the train ahead during recent years.
The Accidents and Injuries that occur on a particular territory have a big weight on what types of Efficiency Tests are performed on that territory.