amtrak obs crew yearly job rebidding

[profwebs]

Well, I guess I have to jump in here too. Having been a Steward in the CWA, I have seen what unions are about. Unions were needed at one time in history, however in the day we live in now, unions do more harm than good. In my opinion, unions have become nothing but a money hungry political machine.

As to the argument of buying an "American car", What is the definition of that now? Most cars whether they be GM, Ford, Toyota or Subaru, have parts made and shipped all around the world these days. I'm all for "buying locally" and supporting local workers. And unions are partially responsible for helping GM and Ford to put out an inferior product.(at least in the past, quality seems better these days, but the price is also way higher)

As to the seniority issue, just because you have been at a company for x amount of time, does not mean the company owes you a certain job. Loyalty is nice, but if you can't do a job well, then you have no right to that job. I HAD to (as a steward) represent someone in my crew many times to keep his job, when I myself knew he should have been fired for not being able to perform the duties of the job. Maybe this is the issue when people here talk about bad experiences with OBS? Maybe they shouldn't be there?

Just my 2 cents,

 

[profwebs]

To get back to the topic:
How are bids done? Is it done where you can bid anywhere on the system or can do you have to bid on your location?

I'm not an Amtrak expert, but I just read a listing here http://amtrak.teamrewards.net/TR_PublicWeb...jsp?public=true

and 1 of the requirements was that you need to live within 2 hours of the jobs base.

Not sure if that applies to current employees or not.

 

[sky12065]

As to the seniority issue, just because you have been at a company for x amount of time, does not mean the company owes you a certain job. Loyalty is nice, but if you can't do a job well, then you have no right to that job. I HAD to (as a steward) represent someone in my crew many times to keep his job, when I myself knew he should have been fired for not being able to perform the duties of the job. Maybe this is the issue when people here talk about bad experiences with OBS? Maybe they shouldn't be there?

Without any assumptions to what you've stated, my seniority discussion did include or imply the situation involving incompetence, but rather employees doing their jobs to the best of their ability and meeting standards. I agree with what you've stated here!

 

[profwebs]

As to the seniority issue, just because you have been at a company for x amount of time, does not mean the company owes you a certain job. Loyalty is nice, but if you can't do a job well, then you have no right to that job. I HAD to (as a steward) represent someone in my crew many times to keep his job, when I myself knew he should have been fired for not being able to perform the duties of the job. Maybe this is the issue when people here talk about bad experiences with OBS? Maybe they shouldn't be there?

Without any assumptions to what you've stated, my seniority discussion did include or imply the situation involving incompetence, but rather employees doing their jobs to the best of their ability and meeting standards. I agree with what you've stated here!

Wasn't directed at you, just the topic. This is just what I see happening a lot, which is a big part of why I'm against unions. Too bad there isn't some "happy balance" of senority/competence, but how would that be decided.

 

[sky12065]

As to the seniority issue, just because you have been at a company for x amount of time, does not mean the company owes you a certain job. Loyalty is nice, but if you can't do a job well, then you have no right to that job. I HAD to (as a steward) represent someone in my crew many times to keep his job, when I myself knew he should have been fired for not being able to perform the duties of the job. Maybe this is the issue when people here talk about bad experiences with OBS? Maybe they shouldn't be there?

Without any assumptions to what you've stated, my seniority discussion did include or imply the situation involving incompetence, but rather employees doing their jobs to the best of their ability and meeting standards. I agree with what you've stated here!

Wasn't directed at you, just the topic. This is just what I see happening a lot, which is a big part of why I'm against unions. Too bad there isn't some "happy balance" of senority/competence, but how would that be decided.

I knew it wasn't. "That's why I said without any assumptions" I wasn't sure that would be clear. Anyway, happy railing!

 

[sechs]

They're fair to the employees because it rewards them for longivity is faithful service and it doesn't peanilize employees who meet job standards to the best of their ability. If you are blessed to be able to prerform above and beyond what's expected that's great and you should be rewarded but not at the expense of others who cannot.

Let's take off the union propaganda hat and think about this logically.

You say the seniority system is fair because (1) it rewards employees for faithful service and (2) does not penalize employees who are doing the best that they can.

I don't think that there's much to quibble about (1), except for how its done, not necessarily the results.

For (2), on the other hand, you go on to basically disprove your own point. You say that, if someone does the job extremely well, they should not be rewarded at the expense of those who cannot. This is to say, they should be penalized for doing the best that they can.

You can agree to disagree, but it's hard to disagree with yourself.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

As to the seniority issue, just because you have been at a company for x amount of time, does not mean the company owes you a certain job. Loyalty is nice, but if you can't do a job well, then you have no right to that job. I HAD to (as a steward) represent someone in my crew many times to keep his job, when I myself knew he should have been fired for not being able to perform the duties of the job. Maybe this is the issue when people here talk about bad experiences with OBS? Maybe they shouldn't be there?

Without any assumptions to what you've stated, my seniority discussion did include or imply the situation involving incompetence, but rather employees doing their jobs to the best of their ability and meeting standards. I agree with what you've stated here!

If that's the case then why does seniority matter?

I go back to my old refrain: The job always goes to the most qualified.

If that person has the most seniority- great, if they don't, still great- because (1) the passengers will benefit from having a more qualified OBS members and (2) the company will benefit from the passengers satisfaction and (3) the company doing better will be able to increase service, thus jobs and wages overall.

It's not a magical thing, it is a process. It is common sense, you put your best men out there.

Seniority (as in years of service) factors into qualifications too. I don't disvalue years of service, as long as they were good years. But its not the only thing that factors in... and thus to treat it like it is the only thing that factors in- well its insane.

 

[sky12065]

They're fair to the employees because it rewards them for longivity is faithful service and it doesn't peanilize employees who meet job standards to the best of their ability. If you are blessed to be able to prerform above and beyond what's expected that's great and you should be rewarded but not at the expense of others who cannot.

Let's take off the union propaganda hat and think about this logically.

 

You say the seniority system is fair because (1) it rewards employees for faithful service and (2) does not penalize employees who are doing the best that they can.

 

I don't think that there's much to quibble about (1), except for how its done, not necessarily the results.

 

For (2), on the other hand, you go on to basically disprove your own point. You say that, if someone does the job extremely well, they should not be rewarded at the expense of those who cannot. This is to say, they should be penalized for doing the best that they can.

 

You can agree to disagree, but it's hard to disagree with yourself.

Union propaganda? I'd like to make clear that I have never been pro-unions as I feel that mine did not always act with the employees best interest in mind and have acted in cooperation with our employer to weaken employee strengths. I may sound pro union at times, but it's because I'm speaking what I feel and not the union expects.

As for your disection of what I said, I would agree with you if you were talking about promotions or bonuses. That's where rewards belong for doing one's job extremely well! As for seniority, longevity for those who do the everyday job that's expected of them needs to be rewarded and recognized for something and job bidding where job bidding exists is that something! So I stand on what I've already said!

 

[sky12065]

As to the seniority issue, just because you have been at a company for x amount of time, does not mean the company owes you a certain job. Loyalty is nice, but if you can't do a job well, then you have no right to that job. I HAD to (as a steward) represent someone in my crew many times to keep his job, when I myself knew he should have been fired for not being able to perform the duties of the job. Maybe this is the issue when people here talk about bad experiences with OBS? Maybe they shouldn't be there?

Without any assumptions to what you've stated, my seniority discussion did include or imply the situation involving incompetence, but rather employees doing their jobs to the best of their ability and meeting standards. I agree with what you've stated here!

If that's the case then why does seniority matter?

I go back to my old refrain: The job always goes to the most qualified.

If that person has the most seniority- great, if they don't, still great- because (1) the passengers will benefit from having a more qualified OBS members and (2) the company will benefit from the passengers satisfaction and (3) the company doing better will be able to increase service, thus jobs and wages overall.

It's not a magical thing, it is a process. It is common sense, you put your best men out there.

Seniority (as in years of service) factors into qualifications too. I don't disvalue years of service, as long as they were good years. But its not the only thing that factors in... and thus to treat it like it is the only thing that factors in- well its insane.

Read my previous post! I'm talking existing job assignments of your "men" and women that are already out there!

I'm not talking a "job always goes to the most qualified" principle, as in hiring or promotions!

I am talking about jobs they already have!

I'm not talking about putting your best men (and women) out there, I'm talking men and women who are already out there in a similar or related capacity!

I'm not talking "passengers satisfaction" since location changes does not really affect overall passenger satisfaction either negatively or postitively... it's a wash! There either here or their there, with the only difference being where the existing service is being provided, and not if there's a change in the service that is being provided! The only thing that could effect customer service negatively in job bidding is if a service person becomes disgrunteled because he's not happy with his current assignment and management affords him little or no chance of location change by not providing a reasonable job bidding opportunity or equivilent! <_<

 

[Green Maned Lion]

They're fair to the employees because it rewards them for longivity is faithful service and it doesn't peanilize employees who meet job standards to the best of their ability. If you are blessed to be able to prerform above and beyond what's expected that's great and you should be rewarded but not at the expense of others who cannot.

I dunnno why I missed it. I think it was mostly my disinterest in getting into the center of crossfire between pro-union and anti-union perspectives (which both have validity, by the way!)

However, Sky, what you are talking about is a concept called Marxism. "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.". Now, I'm not disagreeing with you. We all know that I am a so-called liberal, although I hate the label. I believe what I believe according to where logic brings me, and there are topics where I am extremely what is called "conservative". Whatever.

My point is, there is validity to the concept of redistribution of wealth, regulation of greed, and many other things. We are currently living in a economic pile of crap. The thin ice we have skated for decades crashed because people bought homes they couldn't even afford to live in, let alone buy, with money they didn't have and never intended to earn, with money that didn't actually exist. Thats greed. And then even greedier people decided to redistribute the holding of debt for this nonexistant money by selling Collaterally Secured Debt Obligations.

This shouldn't have happened. When Roosevelt finished with his New Deal, when our economy was secure, it was time for the government to take the money it had pumped into the economy back out. Keynesian economic theory only works when the money flows in both directions, ya see. People are too greedy for it to ever work in practice.

 

[AAARGH!]

My point is, there is validity to the concept of redistribution of wealth, regulation of greed, and many other things. We are currently living in a economic pile of crap. The thin ice we have skated for decades crashed because people bought homes they couldn't even afford to live in, let alone buy, with money they didn't have and never intended to earn, with money that didn't actually exist. Thats greed. And then even greedier people decided to redistribute the holding of debt for this nonexistant money by selling Collaterally Secured Debt Obligations.

GML, very well said.

(Changing subjects)

IMO, unions had their time. To be sure, the Triangle factory fire was evidence they were needed. However, with OSHA and other labor regulations, they are no longer needed. They cause the USA to be non-competitive with the rest of the world, or at least those with substatially lower labor costs. It is time for them to recognize the party is over and it's time to go home. If they don't, there will be NOTHING left.

Also, I saw a union demonstration the other day at a non-union construction job. Where does the union get off saying the job can't be done right by non-union labor? :angry: Do they have a monopoly on skill? :angry: Do they think these non-union guys can't possibly be skilled? Does the union ensure quaility somehow? :angry: (end of rant).

Anyway, back to trains and amtrak........

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

As to the seniority issue, just because you have been at a company for x amount of time, does not mean the company owes you a certain job. Loyalty is nice, but if you can't do a job well, then you have no right to that job. I HAD to (as a steward) represent someone in my crew many times to keep his job, when I myself knew he should have been fired for not being able to perform the duties of the job. Maybe this is the issue when people here talk about bad experiences with OBS? Maybe they shouldn't be there?

Without any assumptions to what you've stated, my seniority discussion did include or imply the situation involving incompetence, but rather employees doing their jobs to the best of their ability and meeting standards. I agree with what you've stated here!

If that's the case then why does seniority matter?

I go back to my old refrain: The job always goes to the most qualified.

If that person has the most seniority- great, if they don't, still great- because (1) the passengers will benefit from having a more qualified OBS members and (2) the company will benefit from the passengers satisfaction and (3) the company doing better will be able to increase service, thus jobs and wages overall.

It's not a magical thing, it is a process. It is common sense, you put your best men out there.

Seniority (as in years of service) factors into qualifications too. I don't disvalue years of service, as long as they were good years. But its not the only thing that factors in... and thus to treat it like it is the only thing that factors in- well its insane.

Read my previous post! I'm talking existing job assignments of your "men" and women that are already out there!

I'm not talking a "job always goes to the most qualified" principle, as in hiring or promotions!

I am talking about jobs they already have!

I'm not talking about putting your best men (and women) out there, I'm talking men and women who are already out there in a similar or related capacity!

I'm not talking "passengers satisfaction" since location changes does not really affect overall passenger satisfaction either negatively or postitively... it's a wash! There either here or their there, with the only difference being where the existing service is being provided, and not if there's a change in the service that is being provided! The only thing that could effect customer service negatively in job bidding is if a service person becomes disgrunteled because he's not happy with his current assignment and management affords him little or no chance of location change by not providing a reasonable job bidding opportunity or equivilent! <_<

Routes are jobs too- individual jobs. Just like working in a store... would you work on the Main St. location or the Raff Rd. location? On the *surface* it seems like there's no difference, but there are many differences.

The demographics across the whole Amtrak system change depending on where you are- and each one of the pax expects good service whether they are a college student going to Washington, a family on the Pennsylvanian, or a honeymooner couple on the EB.

Different attendants prefer different jobs. Some like the three day hop to Chicago-SEA, others would rather just overnight from CHI to NYP. It's my opinion that preference should be given to the most qualified people for that job. Break down the demographics- an LSA on the EB and on the LSL have totally different jobs. They have the same responsibility yes, but the pax are different, the equip. is different, the schedule is different, thus meaning you'll have two different attendants.

Now thats not saying an LSA on the LSL can't go onto the EB or SSL without a hitch, but there are things that need to be considered.

But most importantly is the preference of the employee- if they are happy their service will be better. That is wholly understood. Thus- the best qualified person is given preference over another. Why reward 20 years of mediocre service over 5 years of great service? It makes no sense.

And if it makes no sense, its bad for business.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

IMO, unions had their time. To be sure, the Triangle factory fire was evidence they were needed. However, with OSHA and other labor regulations, they are no longer needed. They cause the USA to be non-competitive with the rest of the world, or at least those with substatially lower labor costs. It is time for them to recognize the party is over and it's time to go home. If they don't, there will be NOTHING left.

That's a bit broad based... What about unions protecting jobs that are going overseas? Unions are still necesary to protect certain industries, and they still add a check to corporate greed. They are flawed, greatly flawed, but still needed.

People have every right to unionize, and should, but unions create a fraternity atmosphere where the oldest and most well-connected members reap benefits for mediocrity.

 

[access bob]

what about the operating crew? they are unionized aren't they? their positions aren't rebid yearly are they?

yes the operating crews are unionized, just different union and different rules, their bidding prochedures are slightly different and the times they bid are different but same basic system.

Bob

 

[profwebs]

IMO, unions had their time. To be sure, the Triangle factory fire was evidence they were needed. However, with OSHA and other labor regulations, they are no longer needed. They cause the USA to be non-competitive with the rest of the world, or at least those with substatially lower labor costs. It is time for them to recognize the party is over and it's time to go home. If they don't, there will be NOTHING left.

That's a bit broad based... What about unions protecting jobs that are going overseas? Unions are still necesary to protect certain industries, and they still add a check to corporate greed. They are flawed, greatly flawed, but still needed.

People have every right to unionize, and should, but unions create a fraternity atmosphere where the oldest and most well-connected members reap benefits for mediocrity.

Thinking more about it, I'll have to say you are right about there still being a need for unions. When I said there is no place for unions anymore I was wrong. They are still needed, but not to the extent they once were, and just like our government, its time to completely purge the leadership and start over. Not going to happen on either case, though, so as far as I'm concerned the current unions have no place in our society and after seeing the inner workings, I would never give another part of my earnings to any union.

As for them keeping jobs here how do they do that? If anything, I feel they help drive jobs away.

Maybe the teamsters finally got wise to the politicalness when they jumped ship away from the AFLCIO.

 

[AAARGH!]

That's a bit broad based... What about unions protecting jobs that are going overseas? Unions are still necesary to protect certain industries, and they still add a check to corporate greed. They are flawed, greatly flawed, but still needed.
...

Yes, it is broad based. They do add a (vocal) check to corporate greed.

But, what can a union do to stop jobs from going overseas? They are one (large) reason the jobs are going overseas to begin with. Sure, they can strike, but in the end that causes much harm to both sides and never is beneficial to either side. Strikes kill the companies, and thus the jobs the strike was meant to help.

It's old school thinking in a new global economy.

I do think unions have a purpose, but limited at that. All this about senority only (not putting the best people in place, only the oldest) and other talk such as '15 minutes off for each x hours worked' etc... is killing businesses.

OMG, I sound like a Republican! I guess that makes me a middle-of-the-road Democrat.

 

[Hanno]

I'm just curious, what is the basic salary paid to those who works for Amtrak on board?

 

[sechs]

As for your disection of what I said, I would agree with you if you were talking about promotions or bonuses. That's where rewards belong for doing one's job extremely well! As for seniority, longevity for those who do the everyday job that's expected of them needs to be rewarded and recognized for something and job bidding where job bidding exists is that something! So I stand on what I've already said!

So you stand by your nonsense?

You clearly don't understand how seniority systems work, otherwise you wouldn't continually contradict yourself and make arguments based on false assumptions about them. And, I think we all know what happens when you assume....

 

[sky12065]

As for your disection of what I said, I would agree with you if you were talking about promotions or bonuses. That's where rewards belong for doing one's job extremely well! As for seniority, longevity for those who do the everyday job that's expected of them needs to be rewarded and recognized for something and job bidding where job bidding exists is that something! So I stand on what I've already said!

So you stand by your nonsense?

You clearly don't understand how seniority systems work, otherwise you wouldn't continually contradict yourself and make arguments based on false assumptions about them. And, I think we all know what happens when you assume....

I could call your opinion and those of some others on seniority as nonsense, but I don't because I chose to take the mature road and give others with opinions different than mine some respect. Too bad others don't have the courteosy to reciprocate!

And as for understanding how seniority systems work, I have 35 years of experience in my career, many of which dealt not only with seniority issues, but with councling employees as a first line manager! So how many years of experience do you have in that area?

As of now I'm through discussing seniority! Enough is enough! :angry:

 

[Ryan]

As for seniority, longevity for those who do the everyday job that's expected of them needs to be rewarded and recognized for something

Yes, that's called "continued employment". If you're not meeting this low bar, you need to be shown the door. Perks such as bonuses, promotions, and the ability to select ones job should be reserve for people that do more than the bare minimum.

What about unions protecting jobs that are going overseas?

On some level, preventing jobs from going overseas is forcing companies to be less efficient, cutting into profits or artificially raising the price of goods. Eventually, some other company will be able to come in and and undercut the company utilizing unionized labor, which is what we're seeing in the auto industry today.

 

[tp49]

Unions still have their place but their role has changed over time. Collective bargaining is one place and although it may not seem so they still do work to prevent employers from trying to take more back from employees. Government unions are really only good for collective bargaining as in a number of states government workers are prohibited from going on strike by statute.

As for jobs going overseas in all honesty America needs to be more adapatable to change. Manufacturing jobs continually migrate to places with lower labor costs. An example is Taiwan. For yeras seemingly everything was "made in Taiwan." Now due to higher labor costs those manufacturing jobs moved to mainland China and Indonesia. Taiwan wasn't as affected by this because their workforce is adaptable.

However, I think there needs to be balance between senority and merit when it comes to work assignments.

 

[Hanno]

I'm just curious, what is the basic salary paid to those who works for Amtrak on board?

Anyone have any input on this question?

 

[AlanB]

I'm just curious, what is the basic salary paid to those who works for Amtrak on board?

Anyone have any input on this question?

Well two years ago we had a post on here from someone who stated that they were a chef on Amtrak with IIRC over 20 years working for Amtrak. He stated that he was paid $22.00 an hour for his efforts and that his job is one of the highest paid OBS positions in Amtrak.

But beyond that, I honestly have no idea. I've never actually asked anyone.

 

[sky12065]

I'm just curious, what is the basic salary paid to those who works for Amtrak on board?

Anyone have any input on this question?

Well two years ago we had a post on here from someone who stated that they were a chef on Amtrak with IIRC over 20 years working for Amtrak. He stated that he was paid $22.00 an hour for his efforts and that his job is one of the highest paid OBS positions in Amtrak.

But beyond that, I honestly have no idea. I've never actually asked anyone.

I looked at Amtrak job listings a few days ago (not that I'm interested in a job) and I think the rate while in training was somewhere around $15-16 an hour. The listings and base locations are on the Amtrak website but I think that some are a little behind on postings; "apply by" dates were passed!