How can personnel problems be resolved?

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I just would like to add that the lowest hourly paid person on an Amtrak train is a waiter/waitress in the diner and the starting pay is around $16 an hour plus tips, plus unbelievable benefits. I only made $138,000 the last year before I retired as an engineer.
"Only" $138,000??? I have a dissertation-earned doctorate and I will never make that amount, not in 2007 dollars, no matter how many years' experience I have.
"Only"? Wow...
 
Well, our society only really rewards the most useful and productive professions, like pro baseball players, pro football players, and pro basketball players. All the professions that don't really do anything useful, like schoolteachers, police and fire personnel, chemists, physicists, engineers (either type) church or symphony musicians, and so forth, don't get paid anything even "in the same ball park" as those really useful, productive ones. We seem to have the most amazing set of priorities.
 
I just would like to add that the lowest hourly paid person on an Amtrak train is a waiter/waitress in the diner and the starting pay is around $16 an hour plus tips, plus unbelievable benefits. I only made $138,000 the last year before I retired as an engineer.
"Only" $138,000??? I have a dissertation-earned doctorate and I will never make that amount, not in 2007 dollars, no matter how many years' experience I have.
"Only"? Wow...
Sorry Chatter, I am light on sympathy here. I don't know what you do with your earned PhD, but I do know there are times that $138,000 is not near enough for the responsibility the engineer has. The wrong move on his part can cost millions. How much can a mistake on your part cost? Maybe part of my problem is that as a BS sometimes I see some very dumb things done by or demanded by PhD's that think the PhD makes them too smart to learn from somebody without a similarly exalted level of education.

George
 
I just would like to add that the lowest hourly paid person on an Amtrak train is a waiter/waitress in the diner and the starting pay is around $16 an hour plus tips, plus unbelievable benefits. I only made $138,000 the last year before I retired as an engineer.
"Only" $138,000??? I have a dissertation-earned doctorate and I will never make that amount, not in 2007 dollars, no matter how many years' experience I have.
"Only"? Wow...
Sorry Chatter, I am light on sympathy here. I don't know what you do with your earned PhD, but I do know there are times that $138,000 is not near enough for the responsibility the engineer has. The wrong move on his part can cost millions. How much can a mistake on your part cost? Maybe part of my problem is that as a BS sometimes I see some very dumb things done by or demanded by PhD's that think the PhD makes them too smart to learn from somebody without a similarly exalted level of education.
Yikes! I am not sure why you chose to grind some axes from your own academic past, nor was I seeking sympathy of any sort. Rather, my point was that, with all due respect to our engineers, it is much easier to train someone to drive a train than it is to create leaders in academic and other fields. There are many jobs in which the the wrong move can result in loss of life or fortune, most of which do not earn the indicated amounts, so that angle does not wash. The question always comes down to how many qualified people may be found to perform the function. When one has a powerful union behind one, the image of one's self-worth sometimes becomes over-inflated, especially when most of the population does not earn anywhere near the same amount, much less turn around and call it "only" $138,000.
 
I think there are 3 reasons why in large part management doesn't do more to get rid of the bad apples. First, the union.
Well, here we go again.....it's the union's fault that Amtrak can't effectively manage its employees. Folks, if Amtrak wants to fire any unionized employee, there is absolutely nothing the union can do to stop it. Yes, there are safeguards in place that ensure that Amtrak follows proper procedure leading up to whatever discipline (including dismissal) that it wishes to impose on an employee. If an employee is to be brought up on charges, then a notice of formal investigation is sent out, allowing the employee to arrange union representation at his hearing. Just as the company has witnesses on its behalf at the hearing, so is the employee allowed to bring witnesses on his behalf. After the hearing is completed, the hearing officer decides what discipline will be imposed, ranging from a suspension ("time on the ground") to permanent dismissal. Whatever the discipline imposed, the employee (thru his union) has the right of appeal, altho appeal does not stay the discipline. IIRC, the appeals process starts with the local Amtrak Labor Relations officer, then to Corporate Labor Relations, and finally to a Public Law Board. If an appeal goes to a PLB, it can take a year or more to resolve. PLB's consist of three members- one management, one union, one neutral - and they decide if the punishment "fits the crime" or if the employee was unjustlly disciplined. The PLB can order Amtrak to reinstate the employee if they find that Amtrak has been unjust in the firing or if Amtrak didn't "dot the i's and cross the t's" in the formal investigation process. Very often employees are reinstated as a result of Amtrak's gross incompetence in the hearing process.

As far as Amtrak's management "getting rid of the bad apples", this is a case of "Physician, heal thyself".

If Amtrak historically had top-notch mid- and lower-level managers, I've no doubt we wouldn't be having these discussions. No matter what initiatives Corporate rolls out, they're totally dependent on the lower-echelon managers to implement them with enthusiasm and energy. I'll have more on that in another post.......thanks for listening to this one.
To put all of this in a more succinct manner: "relentless application of logic." If only Amtrak had managers capable of it... <_<

In my years of traveling on Amtrak, admittedly entirely in coach, and admittedly off and on, so far I have yet to encounter truly wretched employees. I am traveling this coming week on Amtrak, so perhaps I may encounter some. We'll see.

I've seen both sides of this too, though not necessarily on Amtrak. In fact, the only reason I have a job at the moment is owing to a union. It takes two to tango.
 
I just would like to add that the lowest hourly paid person on an Amtrak train is a waiter/waitress in the diner and the starting pay is around $16 an hour plus tips, plus unbelievable benefits. I only made $138,000 the last year before I retired as an engineer.
"Only" $138,000??? I have a dissertation-earned doctorate and I will never make that amount, not in 2007 dollars, no matter how many years' experience I have.
"Only"? Wow...
Sorry Chatter, I am light on sympathy here. I don't know what you do with your earned PhD, but I do know there are times that $138,000 is not near enough for the responsibility the engineer has. The wrong move on his part can cost millions. How much can a mistake on your part cost? Maybe part of my problem is that as a BS sometimes I see some very dumb things done by or demanded by PhD's that think the PhD makes them too smart to learn from somebody without a similarly exalted level of education.
Yikes! I am not sure why you chose to grind some axes from your own academic past, nor was I seeking sympathy of any sort. Rather, my point was that, with all due respect to our engineers, it is much easier to train someone to drive a train than it is to create leaders in academic and other fields. There are many jobs in which the the wrong move can result in loss of life or fortune, most of which do not earn the indicated amounts, so that angle does not wash. The question always comes down to how many qualified people may be found to perform the function. When one has a powerful union behind one, the image of one's self-worth sometimes becomes over-inflated, especially when most of the population does not earn anywhere near the same amount, much less turn around and call it "only" $138,000.
You will get no sympathy from the grunts in the mechanical department. On Board Service employees do have long hours but in a year of full time employment they make more than an car repairman, electrician, machinest, or any other craft person who in the days when Amtrak had it had to serve a 4 year apprenticeship. It take these workers about 3 1/2 years to make $138,000 and they are all unionized.
 
Do those employees all make the same amount for a particular job description regardless of their home base, or does it vary based on the cost of living at a particular crew base? If it is independent of crew base, then the ones that are based in expensive COL locations don't make nearly what the ones who have low COL base cities do, when it comes to net disposables. $138,000 in California or NYC wouldn't be nearly as high as $138,000 in someplace like St. Louis, Pittsburgh, or Mobile, or perhaps Jacksonville or SAV, I would guess. It would probably require something at least 2 - 3 times that much to buy a home in California, unless the real estate prices in CA have gone WAYYYYY down.

I would have to agree, on general principles however, that $138,000 DOES put a whole new light on RR jobs, because that sure is a WHOLE lot more than most folks make, including me, by a long shot. Actually it's more like a good-sized multiple of what a lot of us make.

Of course, it's still chickenfeed compared to a pro baseball, basketball, or football player's salary.
 
Do those employees all make the same amount for a particular job description regardless of their home base, or does it vary based on the cost of living at a particular crew base? If it is independent of crew base, then the ones that are based in expensive COL locations don't make nearly what the ones who have low COL base cities do, when it comes to net disposables. $138,000 in California or NYC wouldn't be nearly as high as $138,000 in someplace like St. Louis, Pittsburgh, or Mobile, or perhaps Jacksonville or SAV, I would guess. It would probably require something at least 2 - 3 times that much to buy a home in California, unless the real estate prices in CA have gone WAYYYYY down.I would have to agree, on general principles however, that $138,000 DOES put a whole new light on RR jobs, because that sure is a WHOLE lot more than most folks make, including me, by a long shot. Actually it's more like a good-sized multiple of what a lot of us make.

Of course, it's still chickenfeed compared to a pro baseball, basketball, or football player's salary.
Let me put some perspective on this amount of money. First of all the word "Only" was used to get attention to the amount of money that CAN be earned. I ate a lot of mosquitoes and drove home at 3 a.m. a lot of Saturday and Sunday mornings to make that kind of money. Also, I was working seven days a week, 30 or 31 days a month. How many of you are willing to do that in an un-air conditioned environment in the deep south where the humidity and the temperature usually are above 95??? Yes, the union was good for my paycheck but I wrote it by the amount of time I put into railroading.
 
, but I do know there are times that $138,000 is not near enough for the responsibility the engineer has. The wrong move on his part can cost millions. How much can a mistake on your part cost? Maybe part of my problem is that as a BS sometimes I see some very dumb things done by or demanded by PhD's that think the PhD makes them too smart to learn from somebody without a similarly exalted level of education.
. Rather, my point was that, with all due respect to our engineers, it is much easier to train someone to drive a train than it is to create leaders in academic and other fields. There are many jobs in which the the wrong move can result in loss of life or fortune, most of which do not earn the indicated amounts, so that angle does not wash. The question always comes down to how many qualified people may be found to perform the function. When one has a powerful union behind one, the image of one's self-worth sometimes becomes over-inflated, especially when most of the population does not earn anywhere near the same amount, much less turn around and call it "only" $138,000.
There are several short lines that will take your money to run an engine. That may be a good starting point to gain some perspective.Try to visualize 150 loaded cars chasing you down a hill and you are at the helm. You, theoretically, could destroy an entire town by one wrong move. Just look at all the derailments caused by bad track. The CSX is under Federal investigation for track conditions. Add that to the fatigue problem of not knowing when and exactly where you might be going when working the extra board which many railroaders do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Do those employees all make the same amount for a particular job description regardless of their home base, or does it vary based on the cost of living at a particular crew base? If it is independent of crew base, then the ones that are based in expensive COL locations don't make nearly what the ones who have low COL base cities do, when it comes to net disposables. $138,000 in California or NYC wouldn't be nearly as high as $138,000 in someplace like St. Louis, Pittsburgh, or Mobile, or perhaps Jacksonville or SAV, I would guess. It would probably require something at least 2 - 3 times that much to buy a home in California, unless the real estate prices in CA have gone WAYYYYY down.

I would have to agree, on general principles however, that $138,000 DOES put a whole new light on RR jobs, because that sure is a WHOLE lot more than most folks make, including me, by a long shot. Actually it's more like a good-sized multiple of what a lot of us make.

Of course, it's still chickenfeed compared to a pro baseball, basketball, or football player's salary.
Let me put some perspective on this amount of money. First of all the word "Only" was used to get attention to the amount of money that CAN be earned. I ate a lot of mosquitoes and drove home at 3 a.m. a lot of Saturday and Sunday mornings to make that kind of money. Also, I was working seven days a week, 30 or 31 days a month. How many of you are willing to do that in an un-air conditioned environment in the deep south where the humidity and the temperature usually are above 95??? Yes, the union was good for my paycheck but I wrote it by the amount of time I put into railroading.
If you were actually working that many hours and that many days in a month, you certainly were not in compliance with the "rest" requirements and I question how you can even talk about safety responsibility when you are working 30-31 days in a row. I don't care how much money you say you earned, but I can't see $138k annually justified by the danger and need for qualified engineers to safely operate the train, if you earned it by working so much overtime.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Do those employees all make the same amount for a particular job description regardless of their home base, or does it vary based on the cost of living at a particular crew base? If it is independent of crew base, then the ones that are based in expensive COL locations don't make nearly what the ones who have low COL base cities do, when it comes to net disposables. $138,000 in California or NYC wouldn't be nearly as high as $138,000 in someplace like St. Louis, Pittsburgh, or Mobile, or perhaps Jacksonville or SAV, I would guess. It would probably require something at least 2 - 3 times that much to buy a home in California, unless the real estate prices in CA have gone WAYYYYY down.

I would have to agree, on general principles however, that $138,000 DOES put a whole new light on RR jobs, because that sure is a WHOLE lot more than most folks make, including me, by a long shot. Actually it's more like a good-sized multiple of what a lot of us make.

Of course, it's still chickenfeed compared to a pro baseball, basketball, or football player's salary.
Let me put some perspective on this amount of money. First of all the word "Only" was used to get attention to the amount of money that CAN be earned. I ate a lot of mosquitoes and drove home at 3 a.m. a lot of Saturday and Sunday mornings to make that kind of money. Also, I was working seven days a week, 30 or 31 days a month. How many of you are willing to do that in an un-air conditioned environment in the deep south where the humidity and the temperature usually are above 95??? Yes, the union was good for my paycheck but I wrote it by the amount of time I put into railroading.
If you were actually working that many hours and that many days in a month, you certainly were not in compliance with the "rest" requirements and I question how you can even talk about safety responsibility when you are working 30-31 days in a row. I don't care how much money you say you earned, but I can't see $138k annually justified by the danger and need for qualified engineers to safely operate the train, if you earned it by working so much overtime.
Not to be contrary but I have to take major issue with what you are putting out about rest. The Federal law requires ten hours rest. You can only WORK 12 hours. You can also deadhead back to your home terminal and collect two extra hours at time and one half. I don't want to break out the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) book but I'm sure any railroader on this site will verify what I am saying. When I started railroading it was 16 hours a day; seven days a week. If you are not aware that this is going on today and don't agree with it you need to write your Congressman and get the engineers some mandatory relief. Again, I was violating no rule or Federal regulation. If you can prove to the contrary I would gladly like to see your evidence, in writing. Incidentally, I was the Chairman of the SHEOP (Safety, Health, Environment and Operating Practices) committee for many years.
 
Do those employees all make the same amount for a particular job description regardless of their home base, or does it vary based on the cost of living at a particular crew base? If it is independent of crew base, then the ones that are based in expensive COL locations don't make nearly what the ones who have low COL base cities do, when it comes to net disposables. $138,000 in California or NYC wouldn't be nearly as high as $138,000 in someplace like St. Louis, Pittsburgh, or Mobile, or perhaps Jacksonville or SAV, I would guess. It would probably require something at least 2 - 3 times that much to buy a home in California, unless the real estate prices in CA have gone WAYYYYY down.

I would have to agree, on general principles however, that $138,000 DOES put a whole new light on RR jobs, because that sure is a WHOLE lot more than most folks make, including me, by a long shot. Actually it's more like a good-sized multiple of what a lot of us make.

Of course, it's still chickenfeed compared to a pro baseball, basketball, or football player's salary.
Let me put some perspective on this amount of money. First of all the word "Only" was used to get attention to the amount of money that CAN be earned. I ate a lot of mosquitoes and drove home at 3 a.m. a lot of Saturday and Sunday mornings to make that kind of money. Also, I was working seven days a week, 30 or 31 days a month. How many of you are willing to do that in an un-air conditioned environment in the deep south where the humidity and the temperature usually are above 95??? Yes, the union was good for my paycheck but I wrote it by the amount of time I put into railroading.
If you were actually working that many hours and that many days in a month, you certainly were not in compliance with the "rest" requirements and I question how you can even talk about safety responsibility when you are working 30-31 days in a row. I don't care how much money you say you earned, but I can't see $138k annually justified by the danger and need for qualified engineers to safely operate the train, if you earned it by working so much overtime.
Not to be contrary but I have to take major issue with what you are putting out about rest. The Federal law requires ten hours rest. You can only WORK 12 hours. You can also deadhead back to your home terminal and collect two extra hours at time and one half. I don't want to break out the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) book but I'm sure any railroader on this site will verify what I am saying. When I started railroading it was 16 hours a day; seven days a week. If you are not aware that this is going on today and don't agree with it you need to write your Congressman and get the engineers some mandatory relief. Again, I was violating no rule or Federal regulation. If you can prove to the contrary I would gladly like to see your evidence, in writing. Incidentally, I was the Chairman of the SHEOP (Safety, Health, Environment and Operating Practices) committee for many years.
You know, I am sure you are absolutely correct in your quoting of the rules and regulations, but I am still saying that I sure don't want someone who has worked 12 hours a day for 30-31 days straight operating a train - or for that matter - any mode of transportation that I use. I am not about to get into the business of writing my congressman to get the law changed, but it doesn't make "safety sense" to allow that kind of work rule.
 
Do those employees all make the same amount for a particular job description regardless of their home base, or does it vary based on the cost of living at a particular crew base? If it is independent of crew base, then the ones that are based in expensive COL locations don't make nearly what the ones who have low COL base cities do, when it comes to net disposables. $138,000 in California or NYC wouldn't be nearly as high as $138,000 in someplace like St. Louis, Pittsburgh, or Mobile, or perhaps Jacksonville or SAV, I would guess. It would probably require something at least 2 - 3 times that much to buy a home in California, unless the real estate prices in CA have gone WAYYYYY down.

I would have to agree, on general principles however, that $138,000 DOES put a whole new light on RR jobs, because that sure is a WHOLE lot more than most folks make, including me, by a long shot. Actually it's more like a good-sized multiple of what a lot of us make.

Of course, it's still chickenfeed compared to a pro baseball, basketball, or football player's salary.
Let me put some perspective on this amount of money. First of all the word "Only" was used to get attention to the amount of money that CAN be earned. I ate a lot of mosquitoes and drove home at 3 a.m. a lot of Saturday and Sunday mornings to make that kind of money. Also, I was working seven days a week, 30 or 31 days a month. How many of you are willing to do that in an un-air conditioned environment in the deep south where the humidity and the temperature usually are above 95??? Yes, the union was good for my paycheck but I wrote it by the amount of time I put into railroading.
If you were actually working that many hours and that many days in a month, you certainly were not in compliance with the "rest" requirements and I question how you can even talk about safety responsibility when you are working 30-31 days in a row. I don't care how much money you say you earned, but I can't see $138k annually justified by the danger and need for qualified engineers to safely operate the train, if you earned it by working so much overtime.
Not to be contrary but I have to take major issue with what you are putting out about rest. The Federal law requires ten hours rest. You can only WORK 12 hours. You can also deadhead back to your home terminal and collect two extra hours at time and one half. I don't want to break out the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) book but I'm sure any railroader on this site will verify what I am saying. When I started railroading it was 16 hours a day; seven days a week. If you are not aware that this is going on today and don't agree with it you need to write your Congressman and get the engineers some mandatory relief. Again, I was violating no rule or Federal regulation. If you can prove to the contrary I would gladly like to see your evidence, in writing. Incidentally, I was the Chairman of the SHEOP (Safety, Health, Environment and Operating Practices) committee for many years.
You know, I am sure you are absolutely correct in your quoting of the rules and regulations, but I am still saying that I sure don't want someone who has worked 12 hours a day for 30-31 days straight operating a train - or for that matter - any mode of transportation that I use. I am not about to get into the business of writing my congressman to get the law changed, but it doesn't make "safety sense" to allow that kind of work rule.
It goes on 7 days a week, 365 days a year until someone does something about it.
 
It goes on 7 days a week, 365 days a year until someone does something about it.
Just curious. Are you talking about freight or passenger trains? Operating ANY train (or any mode or transportation) is potentially hazardous without adequate rest, but I'm just wondering. I had the opportunity to sit and chat with more than a few passenger engineers. In my experience, I don't recall Amtrak engineers working those extreme hours. From what I understood it was more like 6 days/week approximately 8 hour shifts give or take.
 
It goes on 7 days a week, 365 days a year until someone does something about it.
Just curious. Are you talking about freight or passenger trains? Operating ANY train (or any mode or transportation) is potentially hazardous without adequate rest, but I'm just wondering. I had the opportunity to sit and chat with more than a few passenger engineers. In my experience, I don't recall Amtrak engineers working those extreme hours. From what I understood it was more like 6 days/week approximately 8 hour shifts give or take.
I am hoping it is freight, but even that is scary - especially with the hazardous material that is hauled around the country these days. I am almost positive Amtrak engineers do not work this kind of schedule. I know the crew changes are periodic - approximately 8-9 hours - for both conductors and engineers.

Had8ley: I know you travel on Amtak quite often. Is it on passes from your years with a freight railroad - or were you with Amtrak?
 
There is no federal regulation to prevent an engineer or conductor (or other railroad employee covered by the Hours of Service Act) from working the kind of extreme hours Had8ley talked about. The only restrictions are (1) a maximum of 12 hours on duty at one time, (2) 8 hours rest required after less than 12 hours on duty, and (3) 10 hours rest required after 12 hours on duty. An employee can also work "short-rested", for instance working 5 hours, then getting 4 hours rest, then eligible to work the balance of the 12 hours. It's not uncommon for crews to tie up one minute short of the 12 hours, showing 11'59" on duty, so that they won't be "penalized" the extra 2 hours rest. Excepting vacation periods, an employee could literally work 7 days a week year-round so long as the proper 8- or 10-hour rest periods are taken.

As the Railroad Retirement Board bases one's retirement pay on, IIRC, the highest 3 years' earnings of the last 5 years of service, it's not unusual for one to work much harder than normal in order to boost the monthly pension amount. That sounds very much like what Had8ley was doing.....he'll correct my assumption if it's incorrect, of course. Generally speaking, anyone with his seniority in the same craft, with the same railroad, could pretty much "coast" into retirement if they chose to.

As far as Amtrak's engineers and conductors, if they are working a regular job with assigned rest days, they don't get anywhere close to the extreme scenario. Life is more hectic for those on the extra board but, IIRC, even they have at least one assigned rest day per week.

For more on the Hours of Service (Title 49, Part 228, The Code of Federal Regulations), go to

http://www.utu.org/depts/RESEARCH/HOURSOF.HTM
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Especially at smaller stations, one Amtrak employee often runs the show and people need to be patient and wait their turn. The people who show up at a station at the last minute for a train departure demanding service and those who insist on being waited on hand and foot should look elsewhere. Amtrak AINT McDonalds where the employee turnover is high and rude uncalled for customer actions are tolerated because the employees are a dime a dozen and the company just burns their employees out quickly and hires new ones. The customers who fall into this category get what they deserve.
The bottom line is that while most Amtrak employees might not be the most "charming" people on earth, they are professional railroaders with years of experience and some of that experience reduces the amount of fake "Fluff" they put into their customer service attitude. Most do their jobs efficiently and effectively... but most importantly safely and our trains are operated in good hands.
I can't help but compare any customer service issues with Walt Disney World Resort, one of the best places I have ever seen great customer service in action. Disney World has employees who have worked for them just as long as Amtraks, yet they still put any amazing amount of effort everyday into their customer service attitude. While I agree that safety is a #1 priority, if you cant perform your job safely, and politely, dont work in a customer service based job.

Fake "fluff" can make all the difference between a good and a bad experience in any situation. I think that it is very important to treat every customer with respect.

With all that out of the way, I have had many great experiences with Amtrak staff, notabley on the Crescent and the Empire Builder. I have met car hosts and dining car attendants (both sleeper and coach) who have gone WAY out of their way to make me have an excellent experience. And I have tipped them well for that. Which leads to an interesting point, you would think that if money was the goal, that certain staff members would do their best to make the guests happy so they would recieve good tips.
 
There is no federal regulation to prevent an engineer or conductor (or other railroad employee covered by the Hours of Service Act) from working the kind of extreme hours Had8ley talked about. The only restrictions are (1) a maximum of 12 hours on duty at one time, (2) 8 hours rest required after less than 12 hours on duty, and (3) 10 hours rest required after 12 hours on duty. An employee can also work "short-rested", for instance working 5 hours, then getting 4 hours rest, then eligible to work the balance of the 12 hours. It's not uncommon for crews to tie up one minute short of the 12 hours, showing 11'59" on duty, so that they won't be "penalized" the extra 2 hours rest. Excepting vacation periods, an employee could literally work 7 days a week year-round so long as the proper 8- or 10-hour rest periods are taken.

As the Railroad Retirement Board bases one's retirement pay on, IIRC, the highest 3 years' earnings of the last 5 years of service, it's not unusual for one to work much harder than normal in order to boost the monthly pension amount. That sounds very much like what Had8ley was doing.....he'll correct my assumption if it's incorrect, of course. Generally speaking, anyone with his seniority in the same craft, with the same railroad, could pretty much "coast" into retirement if they chose to.

As far as Amtrak's engineers and conductors, if they are working a regular job with assigned rest days, they don't get anywhere close to the extreme scenario. Life is more hectic for those on the extra board but, IIRC, even they have at least one assigned rest day per week.

\

For more on the Hours of Service (Title 49, Part 228, The Code of Federal Regulations), go to

http://www.utu.org/depts/RESEARCH/HOURSOF.HTM
Thank you...you stated it a lot better than I could have.
 
It goes on 7 days a week, 365 days a year until someone does something about it.
Just curious. Are you talking about freight or passenger trains? Operating ANY train (or any mode or transportation) is potentially hazardous without adequate rest, but I'm just wondering. I had the opportunity to sit and chat with more than a few passenger engineers. In my experience, I don't recall Amtrak engineers working those extreme hours. From what I understood it was more like 6 days/week approximately 8 hour shifts give or take.
It's mostly freight engineers that work the extremes BUT would you want to be on board # 1 heading up the Huey Long bridge with an over tired, over worked yard engineer sitting at Cental Avenue, with 150 loaded chemical cars behind him and the train is streched out up the bridge, waiting on you to clear ? Yes, you are right~ most Amtrak passenger engineers have assigned off days and usually know exactly what time they are going to work. A through freight engineer on any other railroad has none of those "luxuries."
 
For those interested in reading more about the crew fatigue issue, check out the NTSB chairman's opening remarks at a congressional hearing in February-

http://www.ntsb.gov/speeches/rosenker/mvr070213.htm

Note that railroads are the only form of transportation wherein the operating employees' hours of service are set by act of Congress. It appears from the statement that 1991 was the last serious attempt to get Congress to abolish the Hours of Service Act and let the Federal Railroad Administration regulate working hours and rest. The legislation supported by the FRA was opposed by both rail management and labor and probably never made it out of committee.
 
For the guy that asked, is it freight or passenger? The answer is that the law does not differentiate. Regardless of what you may think, the hazmats are still far safer on the rails than they are on the road, which is a much less controlled environment.

There is certainly no opportunity for the engineer and conductor to "cook their books" as their is for a truckdriver. There are probably more truck drivers out there writing fiction in their log books than their have ever been novelists. GPS devices may be changing this. I don't know.
 
It goes on 7 days a week, 365 days a year until someone does something about it.
Just curious. Are you talking about freight or passenger trains? Operating ANY train (or any mode or transportation) is potentially hazardous without adequate rest, but I'm just wondering. I had the opportunity to sit and chat with more than a few passenger engineers. In my experience, I don't recall Amtrak engineers working those extreme hours. From what I understood it was more like 6 days/week approximately 8 hour shifts give or take.
I am hoping it is freight, but even that is scary - especially with the hazardous material that is hauled around the country these days. I am almost positive Amtrak engineers do not work this kind of schedule. I know the crew changes are periodic - approximately 8-9 hours - for both conductors and engineers.

Had8ley: I know you travel on Amtak quite often. Is it on passes from your years with a freight railroad - or were you with Amtrak?
Most of my travel I pay straight out of my pocket. Although I was a pre-71 employee I still cannot make a reservation until 24 hours before train time~ not an ideal situation when you need to plan ahead. Besides, I HAVE to go to a staffed station to obtain a ticket before boarding. I cannot board and then use the pass.
 
I just would like to add that the lowest hourly paid person on an Amtrak train is a waiter/waitress in the diner and the starting pay is around $16 an hour plus tips, plus unbelievable benefits. I only made $138,000 the last year before I retired as an engineer. As for the status you only have the read the blurp on this site about the Amtrak engineer who had the daylights beaten out of him out in California. We were challenged many times by outsiders who were technically trespassing when they entered the railroad right of way. Unfortunately, I chose not to attend charm school.
 

PART OF THAT IS NOT TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

They were hiring assistant conductors for less than the hourly wage you quoted there out of Milwaukee last fall.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I just would like to add that the lowest hourly paid person on an Amtrak train is a waiter/waitress in the diner and the starting pay is around $16 an hour plus tips, plus unbelievable benefits. I only made $138,000 the last year before I retired as an engineer. As for the status you only have the read the blurp on this site about the Amtrak engineer who had the daylights beaten out of him out in California. We were challenged many times by outsiders who were technically trespassing when they entered the railroad right of way. Unfortunately, I chose not to attend charm school.
 

PART OF THAT IS NOT TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

They were hiring assistant conductors for less than the hourly wage you quoted there out of Milwaukee last fall.
 

Now wait a minute....the entry rate for new hires is 75% of the trainman's salary. This is probably where you are getting your info. The operating crew makes more than the on board crew. I was talking about on board crews not operating personnel. I was also giving the upper end of the scale. You get 100% of your pay rate when you are promoted to Conductor or have served a certain amount of time as a brakeman (A/C). "Not true" or "Not researched???" would be a better question to ask....
 
Now wait a minute....the entry rate for new hires is 75% of the trainman's salary. This is probably where you are getting your info. The operating crew makes more than the on board crew. I was talking about on board crews not operating personnel. I was also giving the upper end of the scale. You get 100% of your pay rate when you are promoted to Conductor or have served a certain amount of time as a brakeman (A/C). "Not true" or "Not researched???" would be a better question to ask....
By now I have decided that you can prove anything you want by either bad, insufficient, or deliberately selective research. Some of it is accidental. Some is by those others that have developed it into an art form.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top