4 ms·

Well, fix the economics. That will make corporations rational overnight. If a derailment only happens X% of time and causes Y$ amount of monetary loss, you nee

Well, fix the economics. That will make corporations rational overnight. If a derailment only happens X% of time and causes Y$ amount of monetary loss, you need to increase Y. Apparently no one cares when corn gets derailed, and maybe that is okay. If derailments cause human injury, the cost goes up. Toxic chemicals are the classic example. So why not raise the cost when a toxic chemical is released during derailment? You can do it with fines, regulations, etc.. But until you fix the economics, its going to continue to happen. Ask yourself: Over the course of 1 year, it better to have a 20% longer train with a 0.1% chance of corn derailment, or a 20% shorter train with a 0.001% chance derailment? If you arent breaking out excel, and instead using emotions, you never had a chance to make this decision.

SoftTalker 2y ago
Shorter trains means more trains, which means more train crews are needed to operate them. That's expensive, and they may just not be available. They have per-day and per-week hour limits like airline pilots or truck drivers, so they can't pick up extra trips even if they wanted to. And it's another one of those jobs where people are aging out and there aren't enough younger people coming in. There's an expectation that trains will be automated at some point, but we aren't there yet.
- katbyte 2y ago
  Maybe the reason younger people are not coming in is the bad treatment of workers and union busting?
  - SoftTalker 2y ago
    Partly, but the nature of the job involves days away from home, odd work hours, being called in on short notice, stress ... obviously WFH is not possible. Stuff that a lot of young people just don't want in a job these days. More pay solves everything, up to a point.
    - katbyte 2y ago
      I mean that is kinda a result of poor treatment of workers thou? If the railroads hired enough people, didn’t union bust, and keep reducing crew size from 4, to 3, to 2, snd now I think single crew trains? A lot of what makes the job bad would go away.
bregma 2y ago
The problem with increased government regulation of the railroads (including increased fines) is that the railroads are a classic textbook case of regulatory capture. The regulators were captured in the 1880s and there has been no let-up, only increased grip. Remember the "deregulation" movement during the Reagan administration? There are profits to be squeezed, boys, and no amount of government interference can be tolerated: time to make some calls.

SoftTalker 2y ago

Shorter trains means more trains, which means more train crews are needed to operate them. That's expensive, and they may just not be available. They have per-day and per-week hour limits like airline pilots or truck drivers, so they can't pick up extra trips even if they wanted to. And it's another one of those jobs where people are aging out and there aren't enough younger people coming in. There's an expectation that trains will be automated at some point, but we aren't there yet.

katbyte 2y ago
Maybe the reason younger people are not coming in is the bad treatment of workers and union busting?
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  Partly, but the nature of the job involves days away from home, odd work hours, being called in on short notice, stress ... obviously WFH is not possible. Stuff that a lot of young people just don't want in a job these days. More pay solves everything, up to a point.
  - katbyte 2y ago
    I mean that is kinda a result of poor treatment of workers thou? If the railroads hired enough people, didn’t union bust, and keep reducing crew size from 4, to 3, to 2, snd now I think single crew trains? A lot of what makes the job bad would go away.

bregma 2y ago

The problem with increased government regulation of the railroads (including increased fines) is that the railroads are a classic textbook case of regulatory capture. The regulators were captured in the 1880s and there has been no let-up, only increased grip. Remember the "deregulation" movement during the Reagan administration? There are profits to be squeezed, boys, and no amount of government interference can be tolerated: time to make some calls.