It is currently Sun Oct 22, 2017 4:49 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:05 pm 

Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 8:30 am
Posts: 84
With E. Hunter Harrison is CSX new CEO Could he hurt CSX like the CP? I saw a video on youtube about workers on the CP. The workers say that Harrison made so many cuts that it hurt the workers and made the CP into a liability. Harrison cut training time from 6 months to 12 weeks, cut the staff that created worker fatigue, no warm up breaks in the winter, leave cars in the yard and nobody knows that they're there. Harrison also cut maintenance time to a point where it doesn't matter if they're ready or not get it out of there. Harrison put profit ahead of safety. The workers and fans call E. Hunter Harrison as "you know who". oh yeah he also tried to make a railroad monopoly by merging CP with CSX and later NS.

oh sure he made the CP profitable of course but he was reckless putting profit over safety.

My fear is will E. Hunter Harrison do the exact same thing with CSX? During his time with the CP he made the railroad into a liability will he do the same with CSX?

your thoughts


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:57 pm 

Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:14 pm
Posts: 54
Harrison's model is nothing new or revolutionary. Take control, cut everything to turn a huge profit, go on like that for a few years, make the shareholders happy and take huge bonuses for your amazing job, then leave before it all collapses. Thats exactly what he did at CP, and thats exactly what he will do at CSX


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:59 pm 

Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 4:02 pm
Posts: 966
Location: Back in NE Ohio
It's kind of obvious that EHH cares not a wit for the company's safety record. Doing away with three-step protection, brake sticks and not getting on/off moving equipment is a step backwards in safe operating practices. The recent Sand Patch wreck apparently was caused by 35 hand brakes being applied on cars in the middle of the train. Apparently the train went into emergency on the Patch, the crew on-board at that time set the FRA required 20% handbrakes for a more than 2% grade on 178 cars, which should have been 36 (may have shaded that a little on the low side). They apparently went on the law, either didn't tell the replacement crew brakes were set and where, or were relieved before the replacement crew showed up, and that crew didn't go back far enough to start finding the set brakes before they started moving the train.

First of all, a 178 car train on Sand Patch! 128 loads and 50 empties. My low ball estimate based on past experience is that that train weighed AT LEAST 17,000 TONS, and probably more. That is just insane for that steep and curvy of a grade. Talk about pucker factor on the part of the engineer! Harrison is going to blow up some small town like Burkardt did in Quebec with his short-cutting and slave-driving. Glad I sold my stock at the top, because he's going to leave CSX a smoldering mess by the time he's done and bailed out with his golden parachute.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:41 pm 

Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:18 pm
Posts: 2050
one good crash with worker fatigue you know where to point. I don't know how he would have gotten onto CSX as CEO


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:43 pm 

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 8:03 pm
Posts: 902
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Y'all forget that he worked his magic on CN! Before that he used to be with Illinois Central...

_________________
CNR 6167 in Guelph, ON or "How NOT To Restore A Steam Locomotive"


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:44 pm 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 7:19 am
Posts: 5233
Location: southeastern USA
The more immediate problem at CSX (according to the Wall Street Journal) is the lack of reliable service to customers. HH says it will all shake out within the next few months - but for industries working on the basis of sustainable just in time service, which they had ben getting, many are already turning to truckers. CSX is chasing its business away to its competitors. The closure of hump yards has also resulted in cars being moved past their destination and then back again, taking much more time to reach destination.

_________________
"Techies never minded eating bits and jots of their work. They were grit and grease inside and out and could turn a pile of junk into a magical kingdom."

Andrea Hairston


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 10:48 pm 

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:01 pm
Posts: 1429
Location: SouthEast Pennsylvania
PaulWWoodring wrote:
The recent Sand Patch wreck apparently was caused by 35 hand brakes being applied on cars in the middle of the train. Apparently the train went into emergency on the Patch, the crew on-board at that time set the FRA required 20% handbrakes for a more than 2% grade on 178 cars, which should have been 36 (may have shaded that a little on the low side). They apparently went on the law, either didn't tell the replacement crew brakes were set and where, or were relieved before the replacement crew showed up, and that crew didn't go back far enough to start finding the set brakes before they started moving the train.

First of all, a 178 car train on Sand Patch! 128 loads and 50 empties. My low ball estimate based on past experience is that that train weighed AT LEAST 17,000 TONS, and probably more. That is just insane for that steep and curvy of a grade.
https://ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/DCA17FR011-prelim-report.aspx
FRA report wrote:
The first crew stopped the train on a descending grade after encountering air brake problems. The crew applied 58 hand brakes while inspecting and recharging the air brake system. The conductor of this first crew found an air leak on a railcar about 20 railcars from the rear of the train. A CSX mechanical employee arrived to repair the air leak. However, by the time this issue was resolved, the crew did not have enough remaining duty time to complete the trip. Therefore, CSX relieved them with a new train crew.

The second crew, thinking the train may still have air brake problems, kept all 58 hand brakes applied and unsuccessfully tried to pull the train down the hill. The conductor of the second crew then released the first 25 hand brakes, leaving 33 hand brakes still applied. The engineer applied a minimum air brake application and started the train with locomotive power down the grade. The train speed varied from 20 to 30 mph. The engineer switched from locomotive power to dynamic braking three times before the train derailed.

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigators determined that the 35th railcar derailed one set of wheels on a curve 1.7 miles before the location of the general derailment and fire. When the derailed railcar reached a highway-railroad grade crossing, the railcar moved further off the rail, initiating the derailment of the other railcars. NTSB investigators discovered that several railcar wheels east and west of the derailed cars had flat spots and built-up tread from the hand brakes not allowing the wheels to rotate, and bluing due to brake pad friction.

The weight of the train from the 1st railcar in the consist to the 35th, was about 1,631 tons. The weight of the remaining 143 railcars trailing the 35th railcar was about 16,621 tons. The 35th railcar from the front of the train was an empty high-sided gondola within a block of 27 empty railcars


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 4:27 am 

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 9:34 pm
Posts: 1868
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
CSX has a long history of professional service planning and management science. In the past 20 years they have hired numerous staff with MSc and PhD degrees from top management schools, and they have co-authored numerous high quality papers in academic journals in management. Prior to Harrison, CSX had a very sophisticated planning and scheduling system. I know many of these people.

What strikes me about Harrison, is that his decisions are high risk. He is either asserting that all those years of research and development were wrong, or he is just making it up as he goes along.

The proposal made to stockholders that somehow CSX was previously poorly managed and not in touch with its own operations is simply not true.

_________________
Steven Harrod
Lektor
Danmarks Tekniske Universitet
Institut for Systemer, Produktion, og Ledelse


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 7:57 am 

Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 8:30 am
Posts: 84
Harrison could ruin CSX run it into Bankruptcy. He focuses on cost and not service in the business world good service is what makes business good business. he closes hump yards to cut costs but ruin service. Harrison is just one lawsuit away that could fundamentally ruin CSX from either worker fatigue that could cause maintenance failures, derailments, or even death. in my opinion CSX is really putting itself in dangerous territory. I feel that CSX will ruin itself with Harrison as CEO.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:09 am 

Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:06 pm
Posts: 38
PaulWWoodring wrote:
Apparently the train went into emergency on the Patch, the crew on-board at that time set the FRA required 20% handbrakes for a more than 2% grade on 178 cars, which should have been 36 (may have shaded that a little on the low side).

Minor correction. There is no "FRA requirement" for the number of hand brakes to be set. The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) states that a "sufficient number" must be used to prevent movement of unattended equipment. There are other rules for securing locomotives, with or without cars. The carrier may impose a more stringent securement rule than stated in the CFR but not one that circumvents the regulation.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:47 am 

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:01 pm
Posts: 1429
Location: SouthEast Pennsylvania
The FRA "coverup" report, linked above, claims that 58 (more than 32-1/2%) of the hand brakes were applied to hold the train while the brake problem was repaired. Of course, any conspiracy fan knows that the Government lies.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:48 am 

Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 4:02 pm
Posts: 966
Location: Back in NE Ohio
WP Mike wrote:
PaulWWoodring wrote:
Apparently the train went into emergency on the Patch, the crew on-board at that time set the FRA required 20% handbrakes for a more than 2% grade on 178 cars, which should have been 36 (may have shaded that a little on the low side).

Minor correction. There is no "FRA requirement" for the number of hand brakes to be set. The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) states that a "sufficient number" must be used to prevent movement of unattended equipment. There are other rules for securing locomotives, with or without cars. The carrier may impose a more stringent securement rule than stated in the CFR but not one that circumvents the regulation.


OK, so the boxes in the employee timetable subdivision maps that highlight greater than 1%, and greater than 2% grades for purposes of setting handbrakes is a company rule and not a federal requirement? I thought it was a federal rule, but then I thought at one time that "Three Step Protection" was also a federal rule. It's all in how the company presents things to employees, especially if one doesn't bother to dig around on one's own. I actually have learned more about federal regs from this board than I ever did from the company.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:25 am 

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:01 pm
Posts: 1429
Location: SouthEast Pennsylvania
Is there any uniformity among railroads about what the "3 steps" are? Can anyone please post CSXT notices about the changes in required employee safety practices?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:15 am 

Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:18 pm
Posts: 2050
put all the dern hand brakes on, repair it, put the air brakes on, test, release all the hand brakes. done.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hunter Harrison + CSX
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:18 am 

Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 4:02 pm
Posts: 966
Location: Back in NE Ohio
On CSX, and I can only comment about their rule from personal experience, Three Step Protection is:

1) Throttle off, reverse lever centered, which prevents throttle from being moved from off.

2) Full independent (locomotive) brake applied; automatic (train) brakes applied as needed.

3) Generator Field switch opened (off). (Prevents power from being sent to traction motors.)

Now, I've talked to friends from other railroads, one in supervision, who will tell you that Three Step Protection is nonsense, and does nothing to improve safety, but I think it is at least a prompt to be more aware, especially at 3 am in the middle of a 12 hour switching job. I certainly felt a greater sense of safety going between cars as a conductor knowing my engineer had done those things, and as an engineer I felt reassured that I was doing everything I could to ensure the safety of anyone working between cars.


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: