M7, Shawn is another one of those guys who just yell out an opinion with no basis or fact to back it up.
The term "general charge" is a scaled down version of the typical 19th Century term "in charge of the general management". It makes perfect sense to have it the way it is because it is impossible for the Engineer to "manage" the train and run it at the same time. Then as now, the Conductor was in charge of the train, because he is best suited for it and the Engineer is in charge of the Engine because he is best suited for that as well. You were then as now using "your" engine to pull "his" train. This is why even today, he overules the Engineer on matter that pertain to on board the train. Such as train staff, passenger comfort and safety and all things to do with matters that would manage a train. Remember, your taking his train to destinations so he is responsible for that train and where it goes.
Consequently, you the Engineer overule him on matters pertaining to the engine. Such as mechanical, train handling and anything that someone can come up with to do with train operation. The Rule Book states that the Conductor takes charge of the train and the THEM manual that the same Rule Book (rule 1000) requires us to adhere to the provisions of, states that the Engineer takes charge of the engine.
On matters that both the C&E are together on are getting the train over the road. Each are jointly and equally responsible for prompt movement, rules, procedures, care and safety. If they disagree then the policy of the LIRR is that the Chief Train Dispatcher will decide. I am sure there are some Conductors and Engineers who in training asked "what do you do if the other guy won't listen to you" or whatever. I can bet you were told to call 204..that's the Chief.
This is all from a technical standpoint. So with all this said, the reality is that experience is the best teacher and if anyone has more knowledge or a better way, I have no problem listening to it and conforming. I don't care if he is a Conductor, Collector or Engineer.
Regardless of union hype and speeches, none of us are solely responsible for much. This is why any official CTO notices such as those mentioning reporting delays, terrorism, and a host of other things always say Conductor and Engineer this and Conductor and Engineer that. In most cases we are exactly as you said, a team. And for the most part, the vast majority work that way. But on both sides there are a few who think they run the show and everyone else is there to serve them. And when the ultimate confrontation comes, usually they are put in their place.
Speaking for myself, I have no problem taking a train without a Conductor to help him out as long as he makes the effort to ask me beforehand and not through some other trainman. Some personal advice M7...I don't know how long your an Engineer, but if you get a reputation for being the kind of Engineer who helps new Conductors to get the job done and makes a new guy feel at ease, then you get paid back bigtime by earning respect from trainmen and the real bosses, the managers, for your entire career.
Long winded enough Shawn?
. Prior to your post I was going to say simply that the engineer is in charge of the engine, and the conductor is in charge of the train, but I decided not to contribute to Shawn B Mynes apparently succesfull attempt to hijack this thread. Which is the point of my post . We have seen this guy before, he or she is clearly a troll. That should be evident from the name alone "Shawn be Mine's." Plus the fact that his or her's post show that they know as much about the RR as my 2 year old daughter. So because of Mr Mynes we got involved in the "who's in charge " issue which, though I admit has become annual RR.net event , has nothing to do with ChangeatJamaica's question. I would like to propose that in the future we ignore this knucklehead.