Engineer in LA accident employed by "Amtrak subcontractor"

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/14crash.htm

The engineer was the only one of five train workers — three on the freight train and two on the commuter railroad — to die in the crash, Ms. Tyrrell said. She said the engineer, whom she did not identify, worked for an Amtrak subcontractor that had been used by Metrolink since 1998.

How does this work? Does Metrolink contract with Amtrak who subcontracts the Engineer job?

Sounds like a way to avoid unions if so. I don't want to render judgement on if that is a good or bad thing, but that's what it sounds like to me.

This accident is truly horrendous.

no one at Metrolink works for Amtrak anymore, The engineer was employed by Conex a subsidiary of Veolia a frenchcompany that operates Metrolink under contract.

Yes Dutch is right. At 1 time Metrolink contracted there rail operations out to Amtrak and then Amtrak lost the contrack to Connex a few years back. The way I understand it is that Amtrak would like to have that contract back and who knows after 2 accidents with Connex maybe a change is in the air. Unfortunately we all know that accidents can happen to any railroad. It really does depend on the employees to be diligent.

For ongoing discussion about the accident see:
http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 60&t=54858
it really has no place here as it is not Amtrak related.

If you are correct about the contracting, I agree the accident has nothing to do with Amtrak.

Are you saying the article...or the woman quoted is wrong in saying the engineer was employed by an Amtrak subcontractor? I found that odd and I wouldn't be surprised to find out the article was incorrect in that statement. Funny that they would bring Amtrak into the discussion even if they are not involved. Could be a cheap shot.

pennstation wrote:If you are correct about the contracting, I agree the accident has nothing to do with Amtrak.

Are you saying the article is wrong in saying the engineer was employed by an Amtrak subcontractor? I found that surprising and I wouldn't be surprised to find out the article was incorrect in that statement. Funny that they would bring Amtrak into the discussion even if they are not involved. Could be a cheap shot.

No, it's not. It's simply a misunderstanding. Amtrak had the contract before Connex did, and the reporter may have simply made a bad assumption. There are no Amtrak employees or subcontractors working at Metrolink, but most of the current Connex employees are former Amtrak guys who have been running the trains virtually since it started. No conspiracy; case closed.

After re reading the article I'm not sure the reporter was to blame. The Amtrak subcontractor comment was attributed to Denise Tyrrell, a spokesperson for the "rail line". I am assuming the rail line is Metrolink. I'm sensing some a$$ covering here and a pointing of a finger at Amtrak even though they had nothing to do with it. If I was confused about this I guarantee the general public will be.

MODERATOR'S NOTE:

Metrolink is not Amtrak. Metrolink is not operated by Amtrak. It used to be, but it isn't today. And the events that occurred on the evening of September 12th had very, very little to do with Amtrak - Amtrak ran a few trains on the same stretch of track.

This thread is locked. For ongoing discussion, please refer to the active thread in the California Commuter and Transit forum.

Thank you, DutchRailfan, for flagging the active thread previously.

Thanks,