I think when we discuss and establish/identify best practices that we keep in mind that there should be a menu of best practices offered wherever possible. And each item in the menu should have a good explanation with it as to why it's a best practice along with the pro's and con's. One best practice might be mutually exclusive to another best practice.

For example - it's a best practice to conserve your cash at every possible opportunity. So we pay a vendor or a contractor just as late as we possibly can get away with it - maybe 120 days later than we agreed to. Another best practice is to pay the vendor on the agreed upon dates and those dates represent reasonable terms within the industry such as within 15 to 30 days of the invoice date. The effect on the vendor or contractor can be signicant and the progress of our restoration may be affected. Which way suits us best ?

I have never moved a steam locomotive but from reading RYPN - I think there are several good ways this can be done successfully.


Arnie Johnson

This is a small networked community. It is NEVER a good practice to not pay on time, you will quickly develop a reputation that will rebound in high bids and enforced penalty clauses.

That stupid example aside, there are a number of good ways to do almost any job, and it is up to the project manager to find the best way depending on circumstances.

dave

Dave- I am in total agreement with you that it is NEVER a good practice to not pay your vendors/contractors on time. I feel very strongly about this. Unfortunately there are some who actually will go down the path in the other direction and think it's perfectly fine.

I have personally witnessed signicant extensions of vendors payments up to 180 days in the corporate world because someone read or attended a seminar wherever it was said that this was a best practice and took it a face value without thinking everything through. This is why I recommended an explanation for each best practice whether it be administrative or technical.

This brings me to the final point - and one I believe you have referred to before in this thread - the care we use in selecting our restoration project leadership is really important.



Arnie Johnson

When small contractors have difficulty getting paid the first thing they normally cut back on is the short duration jobs that require travel expense. i.e.: Those situations where you need them there immediately to do an urgent task that probably only they have the tools or knowledge to do for you. They have to float that travel expense until they get paid so why expend their resources on small jobs for poor payers where the travel cost may be more than what they are getting paid for the work. So the people that need the service primarily hurt themselves by paying late.

But beyond that, the financial reputation of preservation organizations tends to precede them and is often well known in the supplier network. And in some areas the poor payment record of some outfits has poisoned the water for other organizations that are much more responsible. Preservation organizations do not have the business volume or financial clout to be playing late payment games with suppliers or with the commercial railroad industry.

Best practice is always to pay the bills on time and per the terms.

PC

Most steam experts are not independently wealthy. Their credit card companies expect to be paid promptly and it's doubtful an airline is going to float them a ticket in hope they'll get paid at some point.

I had that happen once with a history speech about five hours away. The excuse for not paying was "the treasurer forgot the checkbook." Best practices left me scrambling to pay the bills that month (and they never did pay me.)

Yes, there are unfortunately too many instances in this hobby and industry of individuals and organizations trying to push volunteer non-members into time consuming and expensive travel that their own members and officers would normally be reimbursed for. Before agreeing to spend your family's money for their benefit, read their IRS 990 Form, if they show large amounts for travel but they want you to do it out of your own pocket, start asking why.

Best Practice: If people inside your organization get travel expenses reimbursed, then people outside your organization who you ask to help you should also get their travel expenses reimbursed.

PC

Earlier in this thread Dave suggested reading the article he prepared for RyPN on surveys for steam locomotive restoration back in August, 2003.

This article is still available on RyPN and I hope everyone participating in this thread can take a few minutes to read it. His six step process ( used on an engine Alabama ) strikes me as being potential best practice in many situations. It certainly seems to fit well with what many of us have been discussing for inclusion in Chapter One.

Arnie Johnson

I just mentioned over in the UP steam-shop thread that spawned this one that the UP/Dickens presentation to the Rocky Mountain Railroad Club in early March is now on YouTube. (First part is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3l-xAxl_98)

Something I want to raise here, because in retrospect it really hasn't been mentioned here so far, let alone given the respect it deserves in our manual and planning, is the subject Dickens takes up at about 9:25. While he may come across as a bit pompous giving the Union Pacific official line on this, I think it is important to make it a similarly important part of every aspect of both restoration and operation.

I have noted in some cases that 'familiarity breeds contempt' in some areas, for example when machinists have long familiarity with their tools and techniques. There are a number of ways this might cause problems in an organization that needs continuity across decades and generations.

Good article and good case studies. I think that makes a very good framework to start with.

Another good observation above: this is a small community in which nearly all of the large steam operators and crews know one another. While ATRRM doesn't have the equivalent of Martindale-Hubbell, is it fair to say that word of mouth would usually suffice to find someone competent? Also, if no one else knows the "expert" who has offered to raise Old 97 from the dead, people may need to know that's a worse sign than someone having a bad opinion of him.

Nobody likes to talk about failure, but what are some common failures that cause projects to collapse? I can think of preventable ones:
--hostile government
--infighting among project group (to be honest, probably the #1 deal-breaker)
--overly rosy cost estimates
--assuming volunteer labor where a professional is necessary
--failure to comply with federal and state regulations

...and some that can't be prevented, so a group needs to plan for what-ifs:

--sudden economic change
--negative, like the 2008 crash that made funding all but impossible
--positive, like the oil boom that puts long-vacant property in sudden demand
--damage during shipment of locomotive or parts
--severe vandalism (minor ought to be factored in to begin with)
--change in regulations during a lengthy renovation
--unexpected loss of a major funding source, like a sponsor's sudden bankruptcy
--major natural disaster
--loss of group leader without a clear means of replacement

That last one is a really touchy point because none of us wants to think about it, but it has happened more than once. The strong personality it takes to organize most steam activity isn't always easy to replace. Unless there's a clear line of succession, the whole thing may fall apart as soon as the head honcho retires or, God forbid, dies suddenly. In the case of a disabling injury or death, the whole project may come to a screeching halt because nobody else is empowered to pay bills or authorize work. Even lesser emergencies like a natural disaster, serious illness or family emergency can take a key person out of action. It's not insulting to ask what would happen if the boss were to be stuck halfway across the country for two weeks; it's common sense and good planning to make sure there are multiple means of contact, provisions for remote work as far as possible, and at least one unrelated person who can conduct business in the boss' absence.

Relevant to the safety and safety training issues as mentioned by Mr. Ellsworth, the following is from the Q&A provided with the Training Qualifications and Oversight for Safety Related Employees Compliance Guide issued a week and a half ago, May 1, 2015:

Question:
Which railroad employee crafts are impacted by this regulation?

Answer:
This regulation (49 CFR Part 243) uses the term “Safety-Related Railroad Employee” to define those categories of employees impacted by the regulation as follows:
• Employees covered by the Hours of Service laws,
• Employees performing work as an operating employee, even if not covered by the Hours of Service laws,
• All engineering (MOW) including bridge workers who inspect, install, repair, or maintain track, roadbed, and signal and communication systems,
• Mechanical personnel who inspect, install, or repair any locomotive, passenger car, freight car, or MOW vehicle,
• Any person who, as a primary duty, directly instructs, mentors, inspects, or tests others engaged in a safety-related task (includes first line supervisors of operating employees).

Question:
How can a tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion railroad or a contractor to one of those types of operations, readily determine if this rule applies to it?

Answer:
If the railroad operates on the general railroad system of transportation and the employer (railroad or contractor) employs at least one employee required to comply with Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders, then the employer must comply with this rule.



I will leave it to our many expert leaders in preservation on RYPN to interpret this.

PC

There should be a section or at least a set of resources directed towards those who are unfamiliar with the general world of preservation. I know that it is probably not the best idea to have somebody that is completely unskilled in the use of the required tools undertake a project. However, many who will offer their advice (such as on RyPN) may forget that some of the terms they use are unknown to many. While the manual should not go in depth on the methods used, it should provide trustworthy resources and a basic description of where/when to use that method.

I have to say it’s been a good week or so on RYPN regarding thoughtful discussions. I would like to draw attention to computer technology and the positives of integrating it into best practices. The CAD/Simulation of steam thread delves into the topic of design SW use in preservation.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=38055

Though a standalone topic, is does bring into view the role of computing technology. Just as there is a need for best practices for managing a project to rescue a rusting relic from other nature's "cutting torch" or firing-up ol’ No. 7, there is a need to engage the community at large to keep momentum behind the preservation effort. Today's technology can bring a whole additional chapter to best practices. How to leverage the vast array of technology and media to tell the story after the relic is saved to help it become sustainable. I liken our topic of interest to Aquariums. We have fascinating and remarkable machines that played a major role in getting us to where we are today. But the public at large has a limited ability to connect to the story not unlike visiting an aquarium or zoo. These institutions are constantly seeking new ways to engage the patron. Take the aquarium first you had large 2 dimensional windows into the undersea world this progressed to the 3 dimensional view created by the Shark Encounter tube at Sea World. Back to our hobby. Modern media and computing technology can show relationships and connections in ways that leverage the 3 learning styles - visual, auditory, and tactile. Blend this with a good story and you have way more than a cold piece of steal that once upon a time pulled trains. Anyhow this as a chapter is probably more of a best practices for effective museum exhibits, but when you are sourcing funds to save a rusted relic it’s important to speak to the benefit of saving the relic.

You have a good point. Look at Kelly Lynch's work for 765. The Fire Up 611 effort was also good (until the rogue action, which is a lesson in itself.)

The use of social media is another thing we should touch on, but somebody else has to do Facebook :)

In all seriousness, a poorly maintained website or halfhearted press release doesn't help and may hurt. We found a museum's hours on its site, went...nope, closed. The excuse? "We don't bother with that. The right hours are on Facebook." They may have been, but the museum's page was not available without a Facebook account. That didn't inspire optimism.

Another good thread! Thanks to Becky for starting this and to the many participants!



Huh? Did I miss something?

The announcement that VMT was trademarking everything wasn't phrased quite as one might expect and left a lot of unanswered questions.

The lesson is that there should be someone designated to make announcements, and that any that are important should be run by a lawyer first.