4 ms·

Pretty funny that the railroads have also been trying for years to cut crew sizes to one. All this while building extremely long trains which require a lot more

Pretty funny that the railroads have also been trying for years to cut crew sizes to one. All this while building extremely long trains which require a lot more finesse to manage over complex terrain and in and out of railyards, many of which are not designed to accomodate trains of that length. Place all that responsibility on a single point of failure. Luckily the union was able to stifle that effort in their recent agreements. There is a real danger when bean-counters with no practical experience run a company and look at every component, including the employees, as a cost center that can be trimmed as needed to tailor results for quarterly reports that guarantee that investors will remain engaged.

darth_avocado 2y ago
> Luckily the union was able to stifle that effort in their recent agreements. While most extreme of the measures were cut, railroads are still far away from operating safely. There is a John Oliver episode on Freight trains. You know things are bad, when he has an episode.
- doodlebugging 2y ago
  This is true but the conditions won in the recent bargaining made a huge quality of life difference for train crew members. My family has been railroading for 4 generations and I currently have a close relative working on the train crew for a huge US railroad. Before the agreement, when it looked to all the trainmen like they were gonna get fucked again, there was a lot of anger and frustration with their near total absence of control of important things in their lives. They were literally meat to be shuffled like rolling stock up and down the tracks at the whim of their employer. As the terms of the agreements became more clear they realized that the railroads had to back off on their most destructive terms such that trainmen can now have a predictable work schedule, a higher rate of pay, better benefits, etc so it is definitely true that a lot of shit on railroads was broken and contributed to unsafe rolling stock and working conditions, some of that has been corrected simply by insuring that crews have sufficient manpower to manage the longer trains that are running and that the crews are more likely to be rested before they get on the trains. There has been a total attitude adjustment about employment conditions such that there are fewer trainmen looking to change jobs. This whole collective bargaining exercise began with a majority of trainmen feeling like they had no opportunity to change anything and has resulted in a new-found respect for union leadership in effecting changes that benefit the people doing the work. The railroads, the FRA, the unions, and the administration sat down and worked through problems in a way that gave the employees tangible concessions and that was one thing that most employees would never have counted on happening since the unions had been nearly neutered since the previous collective bargaining agreements were signed around 20 years earlier.
lotsofpulp 2y ago
The same phenomenon is visible at businesses that do not need quarterly reports, like the largest railroad business in the US, wholly owned for more than 14 years by the famously long term thinking investor Warren Buffett: https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkp9m8/what-choice-do-i-have-freight-train-conductors-are-forced-to-work-tired-sick-and-stressed https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkp9m8/what-choice-do-i-have...
- patmorgan23 2y ago
  BNSF is owned by Berkshire Hathaway, which is publicly traded and is required to file quarterly SEC reports.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - lotsofpulp 2y ago
    Berkshire is pretty well known for being led by executives that have very long term strategies. I doubt them having to show quarterly numbers affects that, at least as long as Buffett is in charge.
    - dv_dt 2y ago
      Thats the reputation, but there are a lot of recent short term actions in the businesses owned by that Berkshire that make me think that the values of empire are crumbling to shorter term outlooks
    - doodlebugging 2y ago
      You almost sound like you think Buffett micromanages the businesses that he owns or those that he invests in. I believe that you are mistaken. Everything that I have ever read indicates that he buys companies that are already well-managed with good long-term prospects and then he lets those proven managers operate without interfering. I could be wrong. As far as BNSF goes, I know that when Matt Rose was running it after BH bought BNSF that he was highly regarded at BH. I think he was rumored to be in line to replace Buffett if Buffett decided to hand off his position to someone else. I don't think that happened but I know that Rose was a good person who was available to speak with anyone on the railroad if they wanted to talk directly to him. Like I said, I believe that Buffett looks to make his money by owning profitable companies with strong leadership in markets where they can remain competitive for a long time. Perhaps to you that means that quarterly reports, though required by the SEC, are not important to Buffett or BH since they obviously take a long view before buying the company in the first place. I don't think it means that BH controls the day-to-day operations of any of the companies that they own or invest in.
tracerbulletx 2y ago
It would be cool if executives and large shareholders could literally just run a world where all us little peons only work reasonably hard but not so hard that we are mentally breaking and everything is falling apart and you still get to be extremely rich.
- doodlebugging 2y ago
  It would be even better if the C-level suites in the corporate world were staffed with people who had direct experience doing the work that those they are supposed to manage are doing so that there is no cultural disconnect between those doing the work and those who are getting paid to manage the company. Shareholders can get in line behind employees as far as I'm concerned.
  - piva00 2y ago
    > Shareholders can get in line behind employees as far as I'm concerned. I'd say even more, if a company is large enough they should get in line behind workers, and society at large. For such amount of power there should be systemic mechanisms putting society's interests above shareholders. They can get their share of the pie after that, they definitely wouldn't starve if so.
wkat4242 2y ago
Railroads are different though. You can always just stop in case of a problem. In an aircraft not so much.. That's why trains have a dead man's switch but planes don't. Though I guess at some point in the future they may. Cirrus already has a system that can be engaged by the passengers in case of a problem with the pilot and that will perform a completely autonomous landing. That's on tiny aircraft though.
- dibujaron 2y ago
  Freight trains can require several miles to stop even at full brake application (which will also ruin the wheels). I agree that it's not the same as a plane, but they still definitely can't stop whenever they'd like or for free.

darth_avocado 2y ago

> Luckily the union was able to stifle that effort in their recent agreements. While most extreme of the measures were cut, railroads are still far away from operating safely. There is a John Oliver episode on Freight trains. You know things are bad, when he has an episode.

doodlebugging 2y ago
This is true but the conditions won in the recent bargaining made a huge quality of life difference for train crew members. My family has been railroading for 4 generations and I currently have a close relative working on the train crew for a huge US railroad. Before the agreement, when it looked to all the trainmen like they were gonna get fucked again, there was a lot of anger and frustration with their near total absence of control of important things in their lives. They were literally meat to be shuffled like rolling stock up and down the tracks at the whim of their employer. As the terms of the agreements became more clear they realized that the railroads had to back off on their most destructive terms such that trainmen can now have a predictable work schedule, a higher rate of pay, better benefits, etc so it is definitely true that a lot of shit on railroads was broken and contributed to unsafe rolling stock and working conditions, some of that has been corrected simply by insuring that crews have sufficient manpower to manage the longer trains that are running and that the crews are more likely to be rested before they get on the trains. There has been a total attitude adjustment about employment conditions such that there are fewer trainmen looking to change jobs. This whole collective bargaining exercise began with a majority of trainmen feeling like they had no opportunity to change anything and has resulted in a new-found respect for union leadership in effecting changes that benefit the people doing the work. The railroads, the FRA, the unions, and the administration sat down and worked through problems in a way that gave the employees tangible concessions and that was one thing that most employees would never have counted on happening since the unions had been nearly neutered since the previous collective bargaining agreements were signed around 20 years earlier.

lotsofpulp 2y ago

The same phenomenon is visible at businesses that do not need quarterly reports, like the largest railroad business in the US, wholly owned for more than 14 years by the famously long term thinking investor Warren Buffett: https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkp9m8/what-choice-do-i-have-freight-train-conductors-are-forced-to-work-tired-sick-and-stressed https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkp9m8/what-choice-do-i-have...

patmorgan23 2y ago
BNSF is owned by Berkshire Hathaway, which is publicly traded and is required to file quarterly SEC reports.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- lotsofpulp 2y ago
  Berkshire is pretty well known for being led by executives that have very long term strategies. I doubt them having to show quarterly numbers affects that, at least as long as Buffett is in charge.
  - dv_dt 2y ago
    Thats the reputation, but there are a lot of recent short term actions in the businesses owned by that Berkshire that make me think that the values of empire are crumbling to shorter term outlooks
  - doodlebugging 2y ago
    You almost sound like you think Buffett micromanages the businesses that he owns or those that he invests in. I believe that you are mistaken. Everything that I have ever read indicates that he buys companies that are already well-managed with good long-term prospects and then he lets those proven managers operate without interfering. I could be wrong. As far as BNSF goes, I know that when Matt Rose was running it after BH bought BNSF that he was highly regarded at BH. I think he was rumored to be in line to replace Buffett if Buffett decided to hand off his position to someone else. I don't think that happened but I know that Rose was a good person who was available to speak with anyone on the railroad if they wanted to talk directly to him. Like I said, I believe that Buffett looks to make his money by owning profitable companies with strong leadership in markets where they can remain competitive for a long time. Perhaps to you that means that quarterly reports, though required by the SEC, are not important to Buffett or BH since they obviously take a long view before buying the company in the first place. I don't think it means that BH controls the day-to-day operations of any of the companies that they own or invest in.

tracerbulletx 2y ago

It would be cool if executives and large shareholders could literally just run a world where all us little peons only work reasonably hard but not so hard that we are mentally breaking and everything is falling apart and you still get to be extremely rich.

doodlebugging 2y ago
It would be even better if the C-level suites in the corporate world were staffed with people who had direct experience doing the work that those they are supposed to manage are doing so that there is no cultural disconnect between those doing the work and those who are getting paid to manage the company. Shareholders can get in line behind employees as far as I'm concerned.
- piva00 2y ago
  > Shareholders can get in line behind employees as far as I'm concerned. I'd say even more, if a company is large enough they should get in line behind workers, and society at large. For such amount of power there should be systemic mechanisms putting society's interests above shareholders. They can get their share of the pie after that, they definitely wouldn't starve if so.

wkat4242 2y ago

Railroads are different though. You can always just stop in case of a problem. In an aircraft not so much.. That's why trains have a dead man's switch but planes don't. Though I guess at some point in the future they may. Cirrus already has a system that can be engaged by the passengers in case of a problem with the pilot and that will perform a completely autonomous landing. That's on tiny aircraft though.

dibujaron 2y ago
Freight trains can require several miles to stop even at full brake application (which will also ruin the wheels). I agree that it's not the same as a plane, but they still definitely can't stop whenever they'd like or for free.