done away with. However, this would work a hardship on the dispatcher, who oftentimes can not put out orders fast enough to move his trains. would be more liable to overlook an error on the train register than the conductor, who is thoroughly familiar with the movement of all trains. As a matter of fact, there are only three men who are directly interested in the movement of trains, the conductor, the engineer and the dispatcher, and to allow a conductor to leave a terminal without satisfying himself, by checking the register and asking questions about trains not shown thereon and not affected by his orders, would be extremely dangerous. MR. JONES: I do not see any reason We all know that there is more or less for taking the responsibility from the con The terminal telegrapher is necessarily a bright, intelligent, capable man, who stands at the head of his profession, and who deservedly aspires to the position of train dispatcher; but his duties are such that he should not be called upon to become directly responsible for the movement of trains. ductor, where it is now placed, and I do not see that any additional safeguard would be secured by placing that responsibility upon the operator or the dispatcher. The conductor is the man to know whether he has a right to leave a terminal or not, and it is his duty to check the register and ascertain whether all trains have arrived or not. If we take the responsibility from his shoulders, we simply involve another employe, who is engaged in another department of the business, and who is more likely to make an error and overlook the numbers of trains than the man directly responsible. Any change in the present arrangement would be in line with the system long in vogue that, whenever an error has been made an effort should be made to provide ad ditional safeguards, by additional rules or bulletins, and to involve some other employe in attending to the business. This has really had the effect of complicating matters, so that the important rules are lost sight of. We have nearly 300 standard rules in force in the operating of trains; in addition to these, we have about 100 in regard to the operation of the air brake, 100 concerning the block system, and there are 100 others in regard to other matters, so that a man, to be well versed in the rules, must have at his fingers' ends something like 600 can not be taken away from the conductor and put on some one else, and be called an additional safeguard. In making additions to the rules, with the idea of holding more men responsible whenever a mistake is made, another result is that so many are concerned in the execution of a rule that, when there is an error, it is pretty hard to locate the blame, because every man can throw the responsibility on some one else. I believe, in making safeguards, the proper course is to place the responsibility wholly on certain individuals for certain lines of duty, rules, which are constantly being added to. The result of this is that employes not directly concerned in a matter become involved in what should be one man's duty. I do not think it an additional safeguard to have the responsibility put upon the telegrapher or the train dispatcher, and take it off the shoulders of the conductor, where it properly belongs, nor do I think it would save time. In putting out safeguards covering the movements of trains out of terminals, we should have the engineer present to check with the conductor, and both of them should agree before leaving the terminal that all trains having the right of track over their train have arrived before their departure. The responsibility Therefore we have arrived at a point of that man forgetting something that where the men who ought to really at- is directly concerned with the movement tend to the running of a train alone de- of his train, because of his giving necesvote most of their time, instead, to other sary thought to some mechanical duty matters, one to mechanical duties and that needs immediate attention. the other to clerical duties. Take the The conductor is in the same position. Fig. 8. TUNNEL MOUNTAIN, FIVE MILES FROM THE SUMMIT OF WHITE PASS case of the engineer: When we give him all that he can attend to with both hands and with his head (and I have no doubt both his feet will soon be occupied) and then expect him to handle train orders and determine the time-table rights of his train on the main line, the addition is too much, and there is the chance He is required to keep full data concerning his train-to make reports of delays, seal records, slid-flat wheels, waybills, etc.-and has to sit at his desk to keep data for these reports while the train is moving, probably to some meeting point, and it is not to be wondered at that sometimes he overlooks a meeting point. In addition to this, the engineer and conductor are often half a mile apart on a long freight train, and the only way that the conductor can now promptly call the attention of the engineer to the fact that he is liable to overrun a meeting point is to press the trigger of his airgun and break the train in two. I think the time has come when the conductor should conduct the train, and should be relieved of the clerical duties. His whole attention should be given to determining the rights of the train by the time-table, train orders and communications with the superintendent's office. His place is with the engineer on the engine, and he should ride with the engineer; he should be the third man on the engine, so that, when any doubt arises, he is in close communication, and can call the engineer's attention to any fact that he thinks he has forgotten, without breaking the train in two. Let the clerical part of the business be attended to by a junior conductor, who can take care of the rear, and be held responsible for that portion of the train. Place the conductor with the engineer, to handle train orders, and, instead of requiring the engineer to read his orders to him and delay the train, let him go on the engine and be with the engineer, to be held responsible for the observance of the rules. Place the responsibility on one man, and let him understand that he is to conduct that train safely from one terminal to another, and be with the engineer at all times. If this is done, I think most all of the accidents that occur through errors in executing train orders or overlooking time-table rights will be prevented, and the conductor's pay would be more than made up in the saving of fuel now consumed by the delays which are now caused by the engineer and conductor not being in close communication. One of the hardest things to contend with is to obtain a proper observance of the rules, there are so many of them. Some years ago I knew a man who tried to run his train according to the rules (and this is in line with the axiom of experienced trainmen that a train can not be run on schedule time over a division and have all the rules observed). However, this man endeavored to do so, and the boys called him "Creepy;" he was so often behind time, and seemed to move so slowly, that he got the name of "Creepy;" but "Creepy" was always right; he never violated the rules. On the other hand, there was another con ductor who got over the road pretty fast, but he was frequently in trouble, and his efforts to get over the road and make time, regardless of rules, earned for him the cognomen of "Wild Bill." Now, between "Wild Bill" and "Creepy" there is a happy medium. A man should not be too fast, and he should not be too slow. I think the greatest safeguard can be found by relieying the man who has the mechanical duties to perform and the man who has the clerical duties to perform of the responsibility of running the train, and placing the duties of running the train, full observance of the rules, knowing the position of opposing trains, etc., on a man who attends to these alone, and who should ride on the engine with the engineer. MR. SHEASBY: That duty should never be taken from its legitimate resting place, which is with the conductor and engineer. You can not do it, and, regardless of the necessity for observing the natural logic of the evolution of railroading, we must be very careful to guard jealously the original starting point, which is to hold your man who is captain of the ship absolutely responsible under all conditions. I would also like to bear witness to the truth of what Mr. Jones said in regard to the duties that railroad evolution has piled on both the conductor and engineer, especially with our large passenger trains, and it seems that the immense amount of clerical work that must be done on passenger trains is here to stay. The fact is, these men are overworked, to such an extent that it jeopardizes the safety of lives and property, and the only remedy I can see is right in line with Mr. Jones' remarks, to have a man on the train to be held strictly responsible for the safety of that train, and have another man for the clerical performance. MR. FORNEY: I am satisfied that the time has come when something must be done to decrease the duties of the heads of that train, that is, the engineer and the conductor. I know from personal observation in running freight trains that the conductor back in the caboose is, as Mr. Jones says, half a mile away from the engineer, and, if he wishes to call the engineer's attention, he is obliged to send a brakeman over the train, and by that time he has probably gone several miles, or is obliged to stop, and then he gets a message asking him why he does not make the time. There is only one solution of the matter. From a motive |