Opinion: As a former rail engineer, I need to speak out

[Joe Shlabotnik]

I used to work for one of Montreal Maine & Atlantic Railway’s predecessor companies, Iron Road Railways, as well as two other railroads in Colorado and New England. I have been a freight conductor, yardmaster and locomotive engineer — and I need to speak out.

In my view, what happened in Lac-Mégantic is linked to the continent-wide, 30-year erosion of rules, procedures, equipment and infrastructure in the rail industry, and a culture of corporate acquisition by non-railroad interests that has led to deferred maintenance and deep cost cutting.

I was a proud member of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and I followed the rules, sometimes at great personal cost. I worked for and left three railroads because the personal costs were too high, and yet I have not been this upset since I went to the funerals of two co-workers killed in a derailment on Tennessee Pass in 1996. The railroad unions have been gutted in the past three decades, but if they cannot find their voice now, after the terrible accident in Lac-Mégantic, then they deserve irrelevance.

We all need to speak out for the sake of the people who move our planes, trains and trucks with inadequate support and respect for their health and welfare. We need to speak out for the safety of those who live close to our transport infrastructures and to renew our critical railway infrastructure to make up for deferred maintenance and decay. We also shouldn’t let Lac-Mégantic be turned into a sales pitch for pipelines. Pipelines do not carry hydrocyanic acid and chlorine and other hazardous materials, and they will not save you in the middle of the night. The men and women I worked with will.

The full article at http://www.montrealgazette.com/Opinion+former+rail+engineer+need+speak/8652746/story.html

[hardcover]

1. This is absolutely true

Derailments are usually caused by shoddily kept track. Trains carry hazardous chemicals in outdated tankers in poor condition often break open in a derailment. They will also pull too many of those tankers on one train. Anything to cut costs.

If the tracks were maintained properly and up-to-date tankers were used, there would be far less chance of derailment in the first place, but in the event of a derailment, better tankers would withstand the impact without exploding.
Where there should be two levels of safety, there are none.
I call it criminal.

I am concerned about remote controlled trains too but I don't know enough about them to comment.

[chervilant]

2. Yet another aspect of

the corrosive damages wrought by the corporate megalomaniacs who've usurped our media, our politics and our global economy.

[sulphurdunn]

4. I have had the enlightening

misfortune of spending some gutter time in glitzy places with sub-human parasites. Without writing a book, their business philosophy is: If they're too weak and stupid to stop us they deserve it.

[Laelth]

24. Survival of the fittest--economic Darwinism.

As if they were born in a bubble!

That said, I think you summed up their stupid and sociopathic philosophy quite nicely.

-Laelth

[chervilant]

36. Key to their 'justification'

of their hubris is their paternalism: we are like (unruly, ungrateful, unwashed...) children, and they are our benevolent, wise parents leaders.

[galileoreloaded]

7. Shitheads like Warren Buffet buy and profit while people die. Nt

[Not Sure]

9. Not sure what Warren Buffett has to do with Montreal Maine & Atlantic

Berkshire Hathaway owns BNSF Railway, which was not part of this derailment.

[galileoreloaded]

10. And Csx. Buffet is a shit wolf and part

of the problem.

[Not Sure]

11. I'm curious what safety rules BNSF employees are required to violate since BH acquired BNSF

BH doesn't control CSX either, by the way.

[galileoreloaded]

14. Control, no. Vote on the board via proxy???? How sure do to feel?

cause I've been in a few interesting meetings.

[Not Sure]

15. My experience is a lot different than what I've seen at some other railroads

particularly the ones that aren't union and treat the employees like shit. Yes, it's not all roses at one of the big railroads, but anyone that tells me to violate a safety rule can go fuck themselves. I owe that attitude to a good union and a company that doesn't just pay lip service to safety, but actually embraces following the rules. I don't agree with every priority and every decision, but we're not running key trains on FRA excepted track.

[elleng]

16. Sorry, your ignorance is showing,

Warren Buffet/Berkshire Hathaway acquires healthy entities, and thrives while doing so and helping them continue to thrive. Burlington Northern/Santa Fe is one of those, and its health continues.

[galileoreloaded]

19. Ugh. Not you too! It's ok. His pr team is really good. Nt.

[elleng]

20. I worked regulating railroads for 20+ years,

and know something about them. Has nothing to do with pr.

[MotherPetrie]

3. How unsurprising.

[byeya]

5. Honest question for Joe S: If the crew had engaged the mechanical brakes on each car

could the train still have rolled downhill if the brakes on the engines became inoperable?

[Fuddnik]

6. Not Joe, but as a former Engineer for 31 years, I'll answer it.

If you engaged every hand brake on the cars, nothing would have moved.

The problem is, you're talking 78 cars on a train over a half mile long, which would have entailed the single crew member to climb up on each car, and wind the hand brake.

Another problem, when he parked the train, he was on the verge of violating the Hours of Service Law. He cannot under any circumstances work longer than that. They used to fine the company for violations, but about 15 years ago, the switched the responsibility to the employee, and he's in for some hefty fines if he violates it.

There are not enough crew members on these trains. Add shitty rolling stock, shitty rail, barely safe locomotives, greedy executives, and you have a recipe for major disasters.

[byeya]

35. Thank you very much for answering my question; I appreciate it.

[Not Sure]

8. The number of handbrakes required is "a sufficient number"

In other words, the only way to know whether the number of handbrakes set is enough is to release the air brakes and test the handbrakes. If more are required, they must be set and the release test must be conducted again. If the grade is steep enough, that could mean all handbrakes on all cars and locomotives. If it's relatively flat, it may only mean a few handbrakes. In all cases, though, all locomotive handbrakes must be secured.

The handbrakes on the locomotives may be counted against the total number of handbrakes required to secure the train. From what I understand, the locomotives were separated from the train at some point - possibly during the locomotive fire response - which would reduce the number of handbrakes securing the train.

This railroad apparently operates one man crews (which is utterly ridiculous and completely unsafe). The locomotive engineer was responsible for securing the train and testing the handbrakes, which the railroad attests, was done. If that's true, then the answer to your question: "could the train still have rolled downhill if the [air] brakes on the engines became inoperable?" is no, unless the number of handbrakes was reduced by releasing them or by removing them from the train. The idea behind testing the handbrakes by releasing the air brakes is to plan for failure of the air brakes and verify the train will remain secured.

The quoted piece is a good one. I would recommend reading it in its entirety. I completely agree with the authors comments.

[4bucksagallon]

12. Yeah, up in Maine, when Gilford took over a railway they eliminated........

the fireman or brakeman in the caboose and one of their trains ripped up miles of track and another started a slew of fires somewhere between Rumford and Livermore Falls. On the flip side they did save the price of the brakeman's salary.

[AllyCat]

13. Unions create a culture where workers can speak out to keep others safe.

We are going through this now at the hospital where I work. Management does not want to make any of the changes or improvements to help patient and worker safety. It's just too expensive while they make multi-millions of dollars as a non-profit hospital.

Organized labor brings greater safety to America!

[Not Sure]

17. Well said! nt

[mrsadm]

18. So poignantly said!

WOW

[ReRe]

21. K&R

Just call the North American Continent: AynRandLand. Or Corporatland.

Only beholden' to the bottom line, not humankind.

I don't know if you and Joe Goodrich are one and the same person, but thank you for this OP. My heart goes out to that poor community up in Canada that was literally vaporized last Saturday. As of a CNN news report while ago, 33 dead and 30 still missing. Yes, we need to bring Unions and the safety they provide back to America.

[Joe Shlabotnik]

23. No, we're not one and the same,

I just stumbled across this well written Op-ed today.

[ReRe]

27. Thanks for bringing us the story... n/t

[hatrack]

28. A really good piece of writing, and thanks for sharing it.

[Laelth]

22. k&r for labor. n/t

-Laelth

[Enthusiast]

25. Kicked and Recommended! nt

[Tien1985]

26. I've been living in Maine for

Almost 10 years--and yeah, our train tracks are terrible. There are very few passager trains. In fact, when I first moved here, I didn't think they used their RR at all.

[Liberal_in_LA]

29. great article

[Ikonoklast]

30. I was reading that one out of every three railcars needed to be BO'ed.

But the rail owners risk management figured that paying off a lawsuit over a deadly derailment was cheaper than doing the needed maintenance.

[Lifelong Protester]

31. It may just be a summer maintenance cooincidence

but the BNSF along the Mississippi river in my Wisconsin town has really been working over the tracks, seemingly suddenly. The BNSF hauls a LOT of oil cars along this route, upping the numbers of trains passing through to a large amount.

I have been along that beautiful lake in Quebec, and have looked at the 'before' and 'after' pictures of the devastation and can only think that is could/can be any town along the river here.....

[limpyhobbler]

32. A disturbing cartoon: workers had campaigned against downsizing trains to single employees

https://twitter.com/Martin_Lukacs/status/355690289278636032/photo/1/large

[Hissyspit]

34. And my understanding is that at the same time we have greatly increased the amount of oil

being shipped to refineries by rail.

[HiPointDem]

33. kr

[byeya]

37. About 35 years ago the state of Viginia had a ballot question of Should cabooses still

be required on all trains. Industry outspent safety advocates maybe 100 to 1 and cabooses were eliminated. That made is easier to reduce crew sizes and introduce a new era of rail hazard.