Frailey: "Amtrak has a Chicago problem"

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.
So has RCM only been introduced on the Acela fleet? And nowhere else in the Amtrak world?

As far as RCM and Chicago, I cannot recall whether the article I read mentioning it implied that there was such significant push-back from staff that it was abandoned, or whether I had just inferred that.
 
RCM on the P42 should of started a small shop, such as Sanford FL. Small fleet to get your duck in a row. Have the shop people rotate down for in-service training. So when Chicago start it there would be a understand of what the P42 needed and some support to do a new way.

The RCM guy was ex-military and was cut during a budget cut. If I recall correctly. I can see him easily butting heads with the Chicago personal. New Boss, New way of working, Military can do, Budget cuts. Bye bye RCM.

.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is an insight into Chicago Amtrak from many years ago. Excerpt here, but click through and read the whole thing, and then the rest of his stories. Wildly entertaining stuff. (warning: strong language)

http://railroaddave.com/slug/

What does this mean? It means that if one ran across a new yardmaster (trainmaster, etc.) that wouldn't, couldn't or didn't know how to play the game, then you had an opportunity to educate said individual. If you came to realize that the fellow giving you your work wasn't flexible then you merely nodded, took whatever work he deemed it appropriate to lay on you, gathered up your crew and went out the door. And proceeded to work safely.

'Work safely' is a euphemism for throwing out the anchor, which might be described as: working at a greatly reduced speed. After a few hours the yardmaster begins to realize: he has a crew out there, but they don't seem to be getting anything done? And he might then call the trainmaster, and the trainmaster might come on down and walk right with you as you go about your railroad duties. He would see immediately, or if not immediately, sooner or later, that although your feet are moving, the work isn't getting accomplished.

Can he do anything about it? No. Of course not, because you are 'working safely'.

Railroaders are blessed (and always have been) by more and various rules than you might shake a stick at, as the saying goes. This is because railroading is a very dangerous business - heavy machinery, and all that - and folks have always been getting injured and killed doing it, and each time that happened the powers that be added another rule to cover the sad situation that caused injury or loss of life. This has been going on for so long that nowadays that rule book is an inch and a half thick in very small print, and we carry it in our pockets or grips at all times.

A few examples should suffice. The very first rule is, work safely. If you are ever hurt at work you are in immediate violation of rule number one. As mentioned, there is a rule for everything. All a conductor needs to know is the rules, and the rest is easy. Say you tie onto a cut of cars and give the engineer a 'go ahead', the signal to start pulling on them. Wait a second or two, then swing down (stop) the move. If asked what the problem might be, the answer is; the cars seem to be pulling a little hard - time to inspect the track. And inspect the equipment, it could be a car with a sticking brake? Maybe one of the cars has fallen off the rail? Pulling a car that's 'on the ground' or 'in the mud' can ruin miles of perfectly good track, and adjoining tracks and equipment as well. It has happened before, more than once, and that's why there is a rule in the book that says: if the cars are pulling hard, check everything. The engineer knows how to play this game, too. He might advise, 'the air isn't coming up'. Or it might be he that says the cars are pulling hard. Teamwork.

This can go on and on, (in a hundred different forms) and will, for days if necessary, until things change and everyone knows how to play the game.
I suspect that the game is still being played, and until both sides learn how to get along and work productively together, not much will change.
 
Accountability is a culture issue more than a resource issue IMHO. It does not take resources to hold people accountable.

Interesting discussion of the same subject on trainorders linked to below:

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,3319779,page=1

So does anyone have any insights as to what caused the introduction of RCM (Reliability Centered Maintenance) for P-42s to get completely blocked in Chicago. Refusal of staff to cooperate? If so why is said staff still there?
In order to fire unionized staff, you have to have attentive managers spend about a year writing them up for every single time they fail to do their job. It's actually work to fire the freeloaders. Presumably Amtrak has had "go along to get along" managers at Chicago. It actually needs someone who will start building up casefiles on each employee and working out who's good vs. who's obstructing the company -- but that's hard, nasty work and it's hard to find a manager to do it.

RCM has had exceptional results on the NEC for Acelas, which have some of the highest availability ever achieved on Amtrak. Now there is additional costs involved of course. You never get reliability for free.
From what I can tell from the monthly mechanical reports, RCM is being deployed in Albany. (Well, I guess the tiny fleet of dual-modes REALLY NEED to have high availability.) There seems to be some sort of problem specifically in Chicago.

So was it the lack of desire on part of Amtrak to commit the additional resources or was it staff resistance, or a bit of both?
This really looks like staff resistance, especially given the various anecdotes coming out of Chicago about the totally irresponsible behavior of the mechanical department (to the point where people in other departments such as OBS are swearing at them for not doing their jobs).
 
I suspect that the game is still being played, and until both sides learn how to get along and work productively together, not much will change.
Standard response to this sort of abusive behavior by workers is to shut down the shop entirely and relocate maintenance to somewhere else.

But if you can't relocate the shop, you can still crush them. It requires a lot of extra management, though. Hire enough management to actually oversee *every* crew, and then you can start writing them up. You'll probably have to change the rulebook to get rid of the nonsense rules first, of course.... There are companies where this has been done. It takes resources, because you have to hire about four times as many managers as normal -- the goal is to watchdog the crews so that the slugs end up getting written up until they're fired.

The story you linked by Railroad Dave is interesting, because the correct move for the manager is to quietly send a second manager out to the crew and say "Right, guys. You say the engine's in emergency? I'll check that. Nope, it's not. You're fired for lying to your boss, which is a violation of your contract. Every one of you. Turn in your keys and get off the property; the police will arrest you if you return." You can whack quite a lot of these lollygaggers if you have enough management and you're actually ready to take them down.
 
Remember what Florida East Coast did in response to union action.

It can happen again. Don't give your union a bad name, jackasses.

There's nothing wrong with a proper work-to-rule -- hey, you call in all the stiff switches, the switches will actually get greased, which they oughtta be anyway. Eventually, if everything's being held up by a rule which is ridiculous, the company will get rid of the rule.

But making stuff up? People who do that need to be fired for cause and unemployable. Yep... that includes Railroad Dave. By pulling his particular stunt, he's protecting the slugs, whether he realizes it or not. And if the trains are going out on time, nobody's going to look too deeply into how the crews are violating their own contracts. But if they aren't going out on time, it starts to look favorable to fire *everyone*.

And there is usually a way to fire *everyone* -- it's easier than firing selected people. The slugs and lollygaggers and liars at Chicago clearly don't understand this.
 
The Railroad Dave story came to mind, but I couldn't dig out the source or remember his name off the top of my head. I thought I'd made a post in here about that point, but I guess I hadn't. Anyhow...the problem with a mass sacking approach like that is that you often end up with the dismissals being contested and protracted bureaucratic processes as the unions give the employees not only "due process" but plenty of time to run through that stuff; I'm reminded of the NY "rubber rooms" where the unions actively tried to delay proceedings for teachers facing dismissal as much as they could.

Edit: With Railroad Dave's story, I'm actually surprised that a couple of railroads didn't get together and contest some of the more trouble-causing rules.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think one of the more spectacular wrong moves that Boardman made was to visibly get rid of the guy who was leading the RCM effort. That shows poor judgement as a manager IMHO. It sent exactly the wrong message to the troops. He should have been able to find someone else to budget cut, and in these things actions often speak louder than word. He basically came across as someone who really does not care that much about his non-Aclea trains and LD trains to go out on time so much. Oh well.....
 
The Railroad Dave story came to mind, but I couldn't dig out the source or remember his name off the top of my head. I thought I'd made a post in here about that point, but I guess I hadn't. Anyhow...the problem with a mass sacking approach like that is that you often end up with the dismissals being contested and protracted bureaucratic processes as the unions give the employees not only "due process" but plenty of time to run through that stuff; I'm reminded of the NY "rubber rooms" where the unions actively tried to delay proceedings for teachers facing dismissal as much as they could.
Yeah, but the thing is, what other approach do you use? You can attempt to actually run out (or "promote to do nothing jobs") bad employees one at a time -- which Amtrak should, but it's HARD.

If you've got an entire shop conspiring to effectively not do their job, for decades on end, you need to get the work done one way or another.

Eventually the easiest option is to shut the shop. Move maintenance to Sunnyside, DC, Beech Grove, New Orleans, Carbondale, St. Louis, Quincy, Denver, Kansas City, Portland, Seattle, Milwaukee, Grand Rapids, Port Huron, and Pontiac. You start over in each place, you get a local culture which isn't so irresponsible, one where they understand that their jobs depend on getting the trains out on time.

Sounds ridiculously expensive to open that many new maintenance bases? It's a hell of a lot cheaper than dealing with the *shop which simply refuses to do the work*. Chicago maintenance's unwillingness to do their jobs is costing Amtrak probably billions of dollars in revenue and in relations with the freight railroads.

Even CN complained about Amtrak Chicago's inability to get trains out on time, and they backed that up with evidence. If there were a legitimate excuse, the shop foreman would be saying "We are understaffed. Hire more people." Have we heard that? Nope! We've heard stories of non-work.
 
In my experience, when a work force has to result to these sorts of tactics, somethings rotten at the top.
 
In my experience, when a work force has to result to these sorts of tactics, somethings rotten at the top.
"Has to resort"? Apparently Chicago Mechanical have been acting like this for years. It's probably habit by now!

And apparently the workforce in Wilmington, Albany, Los Angeles, Beech Grove, Bear, Seattle, Sunnyside etc., aren't resorting to sabotaging railroad operations. Do you really believe there's something "rotten at the top" which is only rotten in Chicago? What "top" would that be exactly?

I wouldn't be surprised if this bad behavior started in a different era, when working conditions were terrible and there *were* problems at the top. The situation has changed. The maintenance department at Chicago doesn't seem to realize that they have fairly-recently been given much improved shop facilities, or that they are now the main thing disrupting the entire national railroad system.
 
Eventually the easiest option is to shut the shop. Move maintenance to Sunnyside, DC, Beech Grove, New Orleans, Carbondale, St. Louis, Quincy, Denver, Kansas City, Portland, Seattle, Milwaukee, Grand Rapids, Port Huron, and Pontiac. You start over in each place, you get a local culture which isn't so irresponsible, one where they understand that their jobs depend on getting the trains out on time.

Sounds ridiculously expensive to open that many new maintenance bases? It's a hell of a lot cheaper than dealing with the *shop which simply refuses to do the work*. Chicago maintenance's unwillingness to do their jobs is costing Amtrak probably billions of dollars in revenue and in relations with the freight railroads.
I don't know the truth of what's going on in Chicago, but adding maintenance bases is a good idea. It's just another aspect of reducing Amtrak's dependance on Chicago--not only for maintenance, but as a hub. It may be "ridiculously expensive," but if the national network is going to survive, we need to have reliable ways of getting from east to west without going through Chicago. And many of the cities you list already have bases of one sort or another: Seattle has just built a base, and IMHO, morale is a lot better here than in other places.
 
The OBS complaints about Chicago "turning around" cars without fixing any of the bad orders or watering the cars as they are supposed to -- these complaints have been appearing for years.

This is not work-to-rule (work-to-rule makes perfect sense to me), this is just not-doing-the-work. I actually don't see how the staff at Chicago is getting away with it. Enough appropriate managers might be able to get a bunch of people fired. Of course, the most recent leak I read was of an OBS person calling a *manager* at the mechanical department in Chicago "worthless", which starts to tell us why the staff are getting away with it...
 
Again I end up cycling back around...the fact that there are chronic yard issues and chronic station issues (where the Met Lounge agents basically had to have their arms twisted by documentation-carrying travelers and management alike to allow folks who were supposed to be admitted to the lounge into it) suggests that at least some of the problem is management-related.
 
Jokingly it could be said that Chicago has perfected the advanced "Roll In Roll Out" method of maintenance. Cars Roll In and then they Roll Out, untouched! :lol:

Well originally this was said about Sunnyside, but they appear to have improved there since then and now it appears to apply to Chicago.
 
Put in new management that lives by the ethos of "Pour encourager les autres" and is willing and able to document in order to fire properly.
 
You know, as perverse as it sounds, if it could be kept localized to CHI, it might actually do Amtrak some good to force a strike at the yard there. I can just imagine management indicating no desire to resolve the strike by pointing out "Hey, at least the scabs are doing their jobs!"
 
This all makes me heavy hearted to some degree. I've got some Christmas lights that were USA manufactured, probably in the 1960s and they still work. The wiring is of a fine gauge that enhances the light of the lamps. The label says "Union Made." So glad I hung onto these, that my mom gave me, because anything you buy today is cheap and lasts for a year or so. There's a couple of individual lamps that have eventually died but the strings still work.

And another true anecdote. I once watched a union shop, transportation industry, do everything it could to avoid doing the work. More detail than that, I can't reveal. But it is a true story. How it ended was eventually the work was gone.

Unions have done a lot of good in this country. But their leaders, like thier counterparts in business, can wind up strangling the goose that laid the golden egg. If there is no honor in management or in the union leadership, what then? What happens to ordinary folks? I have a million questions, sure wish I had answers.
 
It is unfortunate that you can't get anywhere without going through Chicago. A hub in St. Louis or further south would surely take the pressure off.
Chicago has a lot of problems. It has long been known for having one of the highest if not the highest crime rates in the nation (US).

It is also extremely windy, and this leads to poor road conditions and freezing.

People have also died there.

In terms of trains and tracks, I agree that a hub in St. Louis is part of the solution. Currently as you know all traffic east of Chicago has to go there first, and all traffic west of Chicago also goes there. While this might seem balanced on paper, it is not. There are other cities that deserve attention, including St. Louis (aka the 'golden' arches), Milwaukee, and Indianapolis. An additional option would be Nashville.

If the network were more evenly distributed we could avoid a lot of these problems and 'spread the wealth' so to speak.

But will they let that happen? No. No, they won't.
 
This all makes me heavy hearted to some degree. ....

Unions have done a lot of good in this country. But their leaders, like thier counterparts in business, can wind up strangling the goose that laid the golden egg. If there is no honor in management or in the union leadership, what then? What happens to ordinary folks? I have a million questions, sure wish I had answers.
I like the wording and emotion in this; it contains both heart and a basic question of business math and purpose. Which will be in some shape or form what Joe Boardman will have to navigate. Amtrak has it's chance to make a spectacular improvement, that shall demand Joe's strongest, firmest, most diiplomatic and precision use of leadership weaponry he has perhaps ever wielded. After reading about this on Trains, TrainOrdders, on here, and elsewhere, it's appalling that if there exists clear evidence of traceable origins that all that has gone on in Chicago can be pointed to there, no rememdy was ever carried to completion. But I would'nt write off all the folks, nor all the claims by them. Often in business, the age old power struggle between managers and staff cause each side to stick it to the other, to see who can wound the other first. What I'm saying is that both bad management and bad workers/staff are the culprits in Chicago. Boardman is Amtrak's leader, right? Then it must, must start with him, whether officially or if someone whispers in his ear and then something clicks and he decides to procede forward.

Because Amtrak can't affort to have a plague of Chicago problems like this; it's divisive and bifurcates the system, making any travel involving a get off - get on at that place a game of risk, like, will I have to stay at a hotel or really enjoy that hard wooden bench that will be my bed for the next few hours. And it's expensive. Bad equipment causes railroaders to hate Amtrak, passengers too of course, and it makes John Mica's claims just a little true. We can't shut people like Mica up if we can't debride the bad cancerous tumors that are in Chicago.

Joseph Boardman, NARP, Amtrak --- this is your chance to shine. Do it right, emerge victorious in this recession without recovery and make it an era in which something amazing was done.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Unions have done a lot of good in this country. But their leaders, like thier counterparts in business, can wind up strangling the goose that laid the golden egg. If there is no honor in management or in the union leadership, what then? What happens to ordinary folks? I have a million questions, sure wish I had answers.
Couldn't agree more. I'm just wrapping up a job where I negotiate for management in the transportation industry (not rail). At the same time, I have many very close friends who are involved on the labor side (in other unions). I'm very respectful of labor, but ultimately, there can be abuses on both sides. I've seen many examples where management was in the wrong, particularly in private industry, or where quality wages and benefits from unionized positions attracted quality, hardworking employees, and I've seen examples where unions have unreasonable demands, or use their protections as a race to the bottom.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top