Union Pacific corporation has asked the FRA for a waiver so that it can start to eliminate dispatchers. The Union Pacific wants to replace human dispatchers with computer dispatchers.
I know most people on here will either cry bloody murder or say its not true. But its coming, the BNSF wants to eliminate conductors, and the UP wants to eliminate dispatchers. Todays corporation only see one way to be succesful, and thats to eliminate jobs, they have no foresight and they have no real bussines sense. They do have a greed factor and that greed leads to short term solutions, for making money now.
I doubt the FRA will allow this. Computers can skrew things up in a hurry. They need at lest one person in there at a time, even if it’s watching over computer dispatchers.
A big oversimplification and obviously not totally true. But they don’t have to provide health insurance for a computer. Or retirement. Or vacation days.
This is what they are supposed to do - get costs out of their operation. Don’t fault 'em for doing what they’re supposed to do. If a computer can do it, a human is going to be displaced. We can’t stop it and we really don’t want to stop it. The reduction in costs will benifit the society as a whole.
But to any individual who is involuntarily displaced the economic pain will be very real. This is where the unions come in. They can’t stop the change, but they can protect their members. Nobody should involuntarily loose their living - but don’t insist on no change.
Heck Fire, the Navy is doing it. They’re automating the ships and reducing the number of crew members required. They’re doing an “auction” in which people “bid” for early retirement. Winning bid gets to go fishing instead of taking a multi month cruise in hostile waters away from his/her family.
UP dispatchers are considered to be management employees, and have no union, as far as I know.
Who will the crews curse and yell at now?
A human dispatcher can react to changes in circumstances, such as trains moving more slowly than expected, to keep things fluid. I suspect that computer control would be more rigid, and things would be bogged down even worse than they are now.
I suspect that this may be in connection with ATCS, which still needs to be adequately developed before it’s practical.
youngengineer says: Todays corporation only see one way to be succesful, and thats to eliminate jobs, they have no foresight and they have no real bussines sense. They do have a greed factor and that greed leads to short term solutions, for making money now.
No. it isn’t greed. It is survival. In a market economy every business is driven to reduce costs, increase productivity and become more efficient. The company that fails to do so will lose to competitors’ lower rates, better service or both. It isn’t a matter of greedily piling up more profit. Instead it means surviving by maintaining an acceptable return on investment. Otherwise, investment money will go elsewhere. Customers will go elsewhere, too, if a company cannot meet the competition.
Computer aided dispatching (CAD) is not advanced enough to take any dispatchers job. The old joke with dispatchers is that they refer to the computer aided dispatching as a trainee that’s not going to make it. There are certain elements of a dispatchers job that computers can and will be better at than a human. There are certain elements of a dispatchers job that a human will always be better at than a computer. I can’t see the UP flipping a switch and changing overnight. Better technology/software and years of testing and training. In other words, the dispatchers desk will continue to slowly evolve just like it always has.
A lot of what the dispatcher does today (at least from what I’m hearing on the radio) is provide an interface between a computer and the train crew. The computer is tracking who ‘owns’ what trackage, issues the Form D/EC-1/TW numbers, and who knows what else. The dispatcher simply relays the information to the train crew, and confirms the readback.
Granted, it’s an important interface, and someone has to be able to figure things out when they start going haywire, but with mobile computing being where it is today, as well as digital signatures, etc, how long can it be before the crew on the train simply skips the human interface (the dispatcher) and gets their “paper” directly from the computer? Confirmation of receipt would be via a special card issued to each crew member, who would have to first insert their card in the requisite slot, then type in a PIN. We do that with email here now.
I’m certainly not advocating eliminating jobs - but it’s obvious from what’s been posted here that it’s gonna happen, and I hardly think what I’ve written here will be news to the railroads…
The dispatcher tells the computer who owns the track, how to route the trains, when to schedual the meets, ect. The dispatcher (if he’s any good) knows the crews, and how they operate. And that makes a big difference in how the DS runs the trains. The DS also make on-the spot dicisions about how and when trains preform work, where they can be held for recrews, does the train need to be held back for conjestion at a terminal, or slowed up to meet the recrew, block connection, etc.
And believe, me things go wrong on an hourly basis. The computer just isn’t flexible or agile enough to react. We have several other automated (mostly crew calling and customer service) systems, and the computer screws up more often then it gets it right.
And heaven help you when the system goes down (like every time it rains). The system comes to a grinding halt.
Great. Thats all we need. Computers controling trains and our Dispatching. The public won’t alow it. It bad enough Train crews can’t even keep their computer controled DPU’s running. What will happen if the Terrorists get control of one of these computer controled Trains? I do not like the sound of this at all.
I have just a couple of thoughts about this: First of all, it seems that the cost accountants are taking over the world. While we need them to tell us what our costs are and to estimate what they would be under suggested changes in operations, they are not competent to make final decisions on most business matters. They are only trained to look at costs and assume that a hamburger chain can replace beef with a mixture of tallow, soybean meal, and sawdust to cut costs without losing customers.
One interesting fact: Quite a number of years ago, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange tried to computerize its trading floor. The whole thing flopped big time and they went back to open outcry; although a number of significant financial exchanges, such as the London Stock Exchange, went to completely computerized trading nearly twenty years ago. My bet is that the computer has a way to go before it can deal with things like washouts, floods, engine breakdowns, etc. any way except by shutting the whole mainline down. Computers can do some things with AI, but only a person has the flexibility to deal with the unexpected or the unthinkable.
Alas, the scenario I described doesn’t involve the computers running the trains. That’s still the bailiwick of the crews. The dispatchers are already using computers… Seems as though I’ve already heard on the air “the computer won’t let me” from a DS.
There is not a reason in the world why a computer can’t interact directly with the crew, as long as communications are there. Going to satellite can help take care of that. The trucking industry has already proven the technology. And this doesn’t have to be totally real time (in case you are concerned about things like tunnels) - how many TW’s does a crew get? Once they have their authority, maybe they report passing block stations, and that’s it. They could even get a display of which trains are where and who currently owns which track.
Where it gets dicey is things like meets, especially if train length is a factor, and sorting out trouble spots if things get bunched up. No question there. But if the CAD system used by FDNY can automatically suggest move-ups and adjust for units not available, then a computer can handle what is really simple accounting - who’s where.
Does the possibility of the lack of bodies filling jobs play into this? It seems that in California anyway that it is very hard to get people to fill jobs that are odd hour (3 shifts). If it’s a physical job it lets a lot of people out. Many in my generation were pushed to go to college to avoid the jobs that our parents had and took pride in. I would think that the labor shortage will get worse as the baby boomers complete the retirement cycle. Around 50% of the mechanics where I work are eligable to retire. I wonder if this is something UP factors in as they are so desperate to fill some jobs they are running radio spots to advertise job openings, good paying jobs even by CA standards.
IN regards to the sat system in the trucking industry, you are still talking to a human on the other end. I have never had a computer tell me what to do while driving a truck.
The FDNY cad suggests move ups but the DS and the Chief still have the say so it doesnt just automatically start rattling off engine 82 to church and vessey just because it says they are due there ( granted if 82 makes it there all hell has broken loose as they are in the South Bronx)
Computers running the world, and I have to take issue with the cost effective crap statement. We have railroads running in the billions of dollar profit margines. They are taking in money hand over fist and doing it with less crews and crying whena guy lays off. SOmeone made a point about getting bodies. Why would a person work for a railroad now after hearing all this? I want to retire in so many years but damn if my job isnt going to be there why bother taking up maybe 5 to 10 or even worse one year away and your gone because of " cost accounting".
I sure the hell hope all you working people support me as I go to Taco Bell when the railroad deep sixes my job. Plus I want all you that seem to think its " cost effective" to get rid of workers will give me your job and address. I plan on making a program to eliminate you! Welcome to the computer generated welfare state .
My job is computer networks. I’m set for life… [;)]
In the trucking industry you may still be communicating with a human, but you are communicating - thus proving the technology. I’ve heard numerous first-hand stories about truck dispatchers hundreds of miles away knowing what’s going on with a truck. If the DS can see it on his screen, you can see it on yours.
The point with STARFIRE (FDNY) is that the system has been programmed to figure out who the best company is for the locale involved. Yes the DS makes the final call, but the computer makes the suggestion and keeps track of the results.
Our local Police/Fire/EMS CAD system is programmed with what agencies are to respond to what location. In the case of fire and EMS, all the DS has to do is press a button and the appropriate alert tones go out. In many systems, the dispatch goes out over the computer terminals in the apparatus (also true in police cars in many areas), along with specific information about the location. The apparatus officer acknowledges via the computer. There does not need to be any voice communication at all.
I certainly won’t question the suggested motives of the corporations. As has been said, it’s all in the bottom line, the individual be d*****d…