M3/M7 Track 7/8 Make inpact at Jamaica

To: jg greenwood

Unfortunately, you are wrong in this. The LIRR does hire people off the streets to become engineers without prior RR experience. I know this as a fact as the most recent class which I attended contained a fairly large portion of people from off the streets without any experience. In fact, go around and ask the many engineers on the property and ask them what prior experience did they have before they became engineers, and many will say "none". There are even folks who go into engine services who were previously station or car cleaners which would hardly qualify as having RR experience. I don't know what other RR's in the country do, but the LIRR does hire from the outside with no RR experience. That is why you will be required to attend the same classes and same expectations as someone who was hired from in house. Is this the cause for the recent violations? Maybe, maybe not. True, not all trainmen will make good Engineers, but some do. When you take into consideration that by hiring a Conductor/ Asst. Conductor to be engineers, these people are already familiar with train operations that we encounter as a crew together on a daily basis as opposed to say someone who has no prior RR experience. If the person who was a Conductor/ Asst. Conductor is dedicated to his/ her job, and obeys the rules as they are taught to us, then yes, they will make good engineers. We also must remember, regardless of our experience, we are still humans who are capable of making errors. Unfortunately, in our jobs, errors can cost us dearly, but that is the nature of this business. What makes a good engineer still relies on the person, and not their experience.

Lastly, while I do not take anything away from engineers who operate long freights, that still doesn't mean that one should look at an LIRR engineer as less qualified because he or she only operates MU's and DE/ DM's. Last I checked, our trains regularly transport way more poeple than does two Boeing 747's combined. Thats a lot of lives in the hands of one person. So if you ask me, LIRR engineers are just as qualified as say an engineer on CSX or UP. There should be a reason as to why our exams are light years more difficult to pass than any other RR exam given across the country. Like wise, each passenger car measures at around 85 feet in length. You do the mathematics and times that by 12, and you get a train length that exceeds many trains that are run on the many short lines across the country and even on some of the major carriers. Don't short change our guys because they don't operate 120 car long trains.

mark777 wrote:To: jg greenwood

Unfortunately, you are wrong in this. The LIRR does hire people off the streets to become engineers without prior RR experience. I know this as a fact as the most recent class which I attended contained a fairly large portion of people from off the streets without any experience. In fact, go around and ask the many engineers on the property and ask them what prior experience did they have before they became engineers, and many will say "none". There are even folks who go into engine services who were previously station or car cleaners which would hardly qualify as having RR experience. I don't know what other RR's in the country do, but the LIRR does hire from the outside with no RR experience. That is why you will be required to attend the same classes and same expectations as someone who was hired from in house. Is this the cause for the recent violations? Maybe, maybe not. True, not all trainmen will make good Engineers, but some do. When you take into consideration that by hiring a Conductor/ Asst. Conductor to be engineers, these people are already familiar with train operations that we encounter as a crew together on a daily basis as opposed to say someone who has no prior RR experience. If the person who was a Conductor/ Asst. Conductor is dedicated to his/ her job, and obeys the rules as they are taught to us, then yes, they will make good engineers. We also must remember, regardless of our experience, we are still humans who are capable of making errors. Unfortunately, in our jobs, errors can cost us dearly, but that is the nature of this business. What makes a good engineer still relies on the person, and not their experience.

Lastly, while I do not take anything away from engineers who operate long freights, that still doesn't mean that one should look at an LIRR engineer as less qualified because he or she only operates MU's and DE/ DM's. Last I checked, our trains regularly transport way more poeple than does two Boeing 747's combined. Thats a lot of lives in the hands of one person. So if you ask me, LIRR engineers are just as qualified as say an engineer on CSX or UP. There should be a reason as to why our exams are light years more difficult to pass than any other RR exam given across the country. Like wise, each passenger car measures at around 85 feet in length. You do the mathematics and times that by 12, and you get a train length that exceeds many trains that are run on the many short lines across the country and even on some of the major carriers. Don't short change our guys because they don't operate 120 car long trains.

If what you're saying is true, then I am for sure mistaken. I'm really having a difficult time comprehending this. Again, the LIRR hires people, with absolutely no previous railroad experience, for engine service? One point though, 12 85' foot cars isn't long enough to qualify as a decent sized local! That's a tad over a 1000', correct? And before you say that your exams are "light years" more difficult to pass than any other RR exams in the country, have you taken the exams required by all other railroads? Do you know anyone that has? That's an opinion, not fact. I might add, I'm in no way demeaning the abilities, credentials, or competence of commuter engineers.

jp, I will verify what mark777 has said. I know several engineers who were hired for engine service right out of the 'civillian' sector and they are all as good or better than those who have advanced from other railroad jobs.

jg greenwood:

I have actually spoken to many engineers and crews country wide as I usually have interest in how the other half lives. When discussion is brought up that we are required to draw the physical characteristics of the RR, I usually get blank looks my way. When I draw them an example, they freak out. Of course, They won't be required to draw their RR since say CSX has everything east of the Mississippi River north and south, it would be crazy. However, if the RRs would require their engineers and conductors to draw the section of the RR that they usually operate in, then they would fall into a similar category to us on the LIRR. I have spoken to crews who work on CSX, NS, UP, and thats not even mentioning the many that I have spoken to on Commuter rail carriers country wide including Amtrak. Unless they are not being honest with me, most of them have not listed many things as being equivilent to the standards that the LIRR have. In fact, some RR's allow you to take an open book test which is out of the question on the LIRR. It has been known that the LIRR does have the strictest exams of any other RR, and that has been frequently said by others from other RR's. It may be hard for some to understand why the LIRR would be the hardest exam to take, but when you take into consideration of the amount of trains that we operate, the many different siganls that we have on the property,(soon to increase), and the amount of people that we transport, one begins to understand why. There have also been folks who have come from other RR's who have taken our exams and not pass. It's not so much based on my opinion, but rather what I have been told by folks from other carriers that make this a known fact.

mark777 wrote:jg greenwood:

I have actually spoken to many engineers and crews country wide as I usually have interest in how the other half lives. When discussion is brought up that we are required to draw the physical characteristics of the RR, I usually get blank looks my way. When I draw them an example, they freak out. Of course, They won't be required to draw their RR since say CSX has everything east of the Mississippi River north and south, it would be crazy. However, if the RRs would require their engineers and conductors to draw the section of the RR that they usually operate in, then they would fall into a similar category to us on the LIRR. I have spoken to crews who work on CSX, NS, UP, and thats not even mentioning the many that I have spoken to on Commuter rail carriers country wide including Amtrak. Unless they are not being honest with me, most of them have not listed many things as being equivilent to the standards that the LIRR have. In fact, some RR's allow you to take an open book test which is out of the question on the LIRR. It has been known that the LIRR does have the strictest exams of any other RR, and that has been frequently said by others from other RR's. It may be hard for some to understand why the LIRR would be the hardest exam to take, but when you take into consideration of the amount of trains that we operate, the many different siganls that we have on the property,(soon to increase), and the amount of people that we transport, one begins to understand why. There have also been folks who have come from other RR's who have taken our exams and not pass. It's not so much based on my opinion, but rather what I have been told by folks from other carriers that make this a known fact.

Your points are noted Mark777. Open book tests? Also out of the question on any railroad I've ever worked for!

When the new signals go in to increas the aspects/indication memorization, will it be a general order makeing them ineffect or will their be an exam given to all C&E? how can LIRR crews operate on inferior signals w/o pilots?

>>>So if you ask me, LIRR engineers are just as qualified as say an engineer on CSX or UP. There should be a reason as to why our exams are light years more difficult to pass than any other RR exam given across the country. Like wise, each passenger car measures at around 85 feet in length. You do the mathematics and times that by 12, and you get a train length that exceeds many trains that are run on the many short lines across the country and even on some of the major carriers<<<

I do agree that the LIRR tests blow the doors off any others. As for comparing LIRR engineers with UP, CSX and the other big roads, I wouldn't go that far. Comparing a 12 car MU with a similar sized 20 car train of 50 foot boxcars is like comparing apples and oranges, they are two different beasts despite the similar size. The guys on the LIRR that can handle long freights are slowly dwindling. Not knocking the younger engineers, they just have a different set of skills then their freight counterparts

JG, they do now hire Engineers Trainees off the street on the LIRR. When you look at the LIRR you do kind of have to reflect on "the old days" because the LIRR still operates much the same way as railroads did years ago. On the LIRR, the UTU and BLE national agreements do not apply so they still have their separate kingdoms as your railroad C&E's once did.

The progression from Brakeman, to Condr to Engineer is part of the UTU national agreement and has been since the late 1980's. This agreement not being in effect on the LIRR does not require a Conductor to become Engine qualified. If a man chooses to stay a Conductor he may..if one chooses to become an Engineer he may as well.

In my experience, my best Trainees were young guys from blue-collar trades. The Asst. Conductors were no better or worse than off the street people. The guys who were Conductors were really good..a couple were fair but for the most part pretty good Trainees.

7285, don't call a Conductor becoming an Engineer a "promotion"...they will brain you with a ticket punch..they consider it a "lateral" move in Conductorland. For my personal feelings, you can call it a promotion, demotion or whatever..I've been an Engineer long enough to not care either way.

Mark777...I wish you well as an LIRR Engineer and appreciate the defense of the craft..but I do have to agree with the guys in here on their point..I ran freight and real diesels and what they call trains today on the LIRR are in no way at all as challenging to run compared to what we used to run in the recent past. You can disagree with me, attack me if you wish..but I was there and am saying it from my personal experience and I think I earned that right. It's not like you couldn't learn to run what they had, it's just that it's gone so there is no need to. Running a 12 car MU is totally different from running a 12 car freight with stone, sand or some other freight. Our Rules are hard to learn, but so what? They are useless anyplace else because no railroad uses them anymore.

Every business today is pulling people off the streets. So many talented unemployed in various fields that no longer exist or at least not in quantity. So, when it comes for a chance at a job, they go for it, some because they are instructed to by government agencies (unemployment services) others because they need the job and any job will do.

BUT...railroads do send their recruits to schools and teach them via simulaters, classroom training, and some on the job experience. It is not like the old go to work at 17 as a clerk or trackworker or switchman and work your way up as you learn because you have 25, 30, 40 year olds searching for a new job and coming into the business. The acuity and prowess of grass roots learning is not there, they must pick it up from books and videos and lectures. Lot's of businesses in the U.S. suffer because of this lack of the apprenticeship learning process. In our technical, computer world, the only thing a person has to know is how to push the right buttons, hopefully at the right time. And the business attitude is that anyone can be taught to do any job at any time without loss of quality, ethusiasm, or integrety. It just doesn't work that way in the long run. (And, no, I am not taking shots at or quesitoning the sincerity nor the integrety of those who are doing the jobs. Its not thier fault the system is flawed and does not work as well as the system before it.)

I would have to say that the craft of engineer is one that is diverse depending on where you are. There are some who will feel that operating an MU, especially an M-7 is not even worthy of being considered as true train operations, but it does have it'stwists and turns that may require the experience of one who regularly operates this equipment. Just look at the DE/ Dm's and even the MP15's and you already are dealing with a different animal. Likewise, an engineer on CSX will have all the experience of operating a 100+ car train over mountains and gain a valuable talent, but might lack when put at the seat of a passenger train. I believe that what ever an engineer operates more, he/ she builds up an experience with that kind of train. I might have gone off on a tantrum before, but I'm only responding that way since it feels like LIRR engineers are frequently being called inexperienced when they rightfully earned their title. MU's and passenger trains are still trains, and still require an experienced touch to make it work correctly. True, the rules that we apply out east on 251 is not something that you will find anywhere else in the country, but emergencies do come about, and when they do and signals fail, the good old fashion manual block territory and rules come to play. It would be jsut helpful to have that under your belt.

The first engineer on the DL&W that I became freindly with was running MU's in the late 50s into the early 60s (his age was well into his 60's, very near retirement)) and he had been running the MU's since steam left the railroad because he refused to run a diesel!

I guess everyone has their favorites. If and when I should become an engineer, I would probably be more inclined to work a freight train, but thats obviously rare on the LIRR. I like the M-7's a lot as well as the diesels. Who knows, maybe I'll be just content to be a Conductor.

It is interesting, the railroad bans cellphone use, but many times we are asked to "give us a call on the cell" because towers dont want to give information over the air. I dont think a conductor copying train orders would get in trouble for using a cell, because it actually makes the move quicker. Personal calls are out.
About all the signals being run, I really don't know what the answer is. I know that with the sideswipe, and the dark signal at F the other night, the railroad is up to about 7 since January. Is it distraction by cell phones? Is it the fact that on the new equipment, the engineer does not have to have his or her hand on the throttle, and the extra time to move it back is a factor? Maybe its time to focus less on litter announcements, and punch day messages, and more on safe operations? Maybe some less chatter on channel 1, like the distracting "RADIO CHECK" we constantly hear from the car inspectors, and M-7 burn ins. They are more annoying then you think, and can be a distraction while we stop and turn down the radio's.
I think Conductors should work together with the Engineers, and whenever possible, don't give the Engineer the signal to move if he can see there is a stop signal. When he cant see the signal, don't give the Engineer the signal to go with out saying something like " with proper signal indication" you have it to go. Thats the way a lot of us work, and I can tell you in 33 years I have never been on a train that ran a signal.

I like reading posts like these. I've always been one to try and learn from other peoples' mistakes, or experiences. Hopefully reading stuff like this can help me limit the amount of mistakes I make as I continue to learn and grow as a conductor.

Another thing that I learned here that I find interesting and will probably try to use when I can is, instead of using the two shorts on the buzzer to proceed, give the engineer the hand/lamp signal to proceed. The reason that the crew I learned this from did this was that it was something involving the customers having access to the buzzer buttons. The buzzers don't have specific personalities, but if the engineer is expecting to either see a proceed hand/lamp signal from a specific conductor, or waiting to hear "proceed" over the radio it's more clear. Something like that lol.

Don't confuse cell phone use for work with cell phone use for non-work. Chatting with your girlfriend about tonite or your buddies about the ball game distracts you from your job and safety. Useing the cell phone to get proper instructions for effeciency and safety is what you are there for. Not being able to descern the difference, to me, means you are not a career railroader but rather someone who just wants a paycheck, underscoring my earlier postings. (Moderator: sorry if this sounds brutal, but it is a great example of my earlier posts and the point begs to be made.)