Pere Marquette Stranded North of Holland

[AlanB]

The defending of Amtrak, CSX and NS on this thread is simply ludicrous. Quoting the 10-hour law over and over is clutching at straws, and the disparaging comments about small-town midamerica fails miserably at the blind defense of everything the railroad does. Funny, how come anything clearly pointing out railroad failings is countered with "We don't have the facts yet", while 10-hour law (or anything else that absolves the railroads) is touted as an absolute that explains everything?

I'm going to try and respond to this calmly and carefully, without my emotions about having been insulted several times in this post getting in the way.

First, it's a 12 hour rule, or an 8 hour rule, but there is no 10 hour rule.

Second, I don't think that I defended anyone really, and I definitely didn't defend CSX. In fact, even though I did issue the disclaimer "that the facts weren't all in", I'm pretty sure that I accused CSX of screwing up.

Third, while you may not like the idea, the simple reality is that all we have so far is a few reports from a newspaper. Need I remind you that 95% of the time, the newspapers can't even get the fact that the engineer runs the train correct. I can't count how many times I've read in a story that the conductor was driving the train.

So I'm sorry, whether you like it or not, we don't have any verifiable facts about what happened, other than the fact that the train was hours late and that it wasn't stopped in the station at Holland. We don't know who did what, said what, and decided what! That is a fact!

Us stupid Midwesterners know all about the Hours Of Service law, so quit reminding us. PM's crew is based out of Chicago, and there's barely 10 hours between arrival in Grand Rapids and the next morning's departure. Many of us check the arrival the night before to find out if we have to wait for departure the next day--- many's the time we had a 9:00 AM departure thanks to that rule.

Apparently you don't know about the rule, since you keep insisting that it's 10 hours.

Holland's station is actually larger than the pole-barn station in Grand Rapids, and is right next to Business/Old US-31, plus a commercial district. Unload the passengers and THEN move the train. It was going to outlaw in MINUTES and couldn't make it to Grand Rapids anyway. While only 15 miles away, a lot of time is scheduled between the two, with over HALF of it tabbed at traversing Wyoming Yards. If keeping the Main clear was so important, there was the old C&MLS line to the south, and the Black Lake siding immediately North, both with main road access immediately adjacent to the tracks and a fr improvement in access than the yard.

No, the crew wasn't going to outlaw in a matter of minutes. The first crew out of Chicago would have outlawed before the train reached Holland. The train was already on its second crew when it reached Holland. How do I know this? Simple math. The crew has to report prior to the departure of the train. I believe that it's one hour before departure, especially for the conductor who has to pull manifests and train orders. The PM departs Chicago at 5:20 PM, which means that the crew came on duty at 4:20 PM. Now under normal circumstances, the engineer changes in Grand Rapids, not sure about the conductors though.

Therefore if the newspaper story is indeed correct and the train arrived into Holland at 5:10 AM the next morning, the crew would have outlawed before arrival into Holland, not after.

Sorry, Alan, there is NO requirement than an Amtrak crew run an Amtrak locomotive. CSX dispatched the train, and knew how long it had been out there. It left Chicago at 5:40 PM, just like it has the past 7,500 times before. No excuse. Counting to ten is not "a difficult job". If parents can drive out from Grand Rapids to get their children, CSX can send out a crew from Wyoming, which is closer. What crew wouldn't want that once-in-a-lifetime job of running a passenger train for an hour, getting almost a day's pay doing so, and possibly getting quite a few pats on the back? CSX would bill Amtrak for the hours, so the "making more money off freight" argument doesn't work. INEXCUSABLE.

First, I don't recall ever saying that an Amtrak crew had to run the train. That said, I'm not sure that I've ever heard of a non-Amtrak crew operating an Amtrak train. In fact when Amtrak runs on an alternative routing from the normal, the freight RR usually supplies a pilot, but the Amtrak crew remains in overall control of the train. Additionally, I'm not sure if a freight conductor is allowed to be the conductor of a passenger train. And I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't some insurance issues involved here either.

All of that said, the entire region was suffering from massive delays due to the weather conditions, not just Amtrak. What the heck makes you think that CSX just happened to have a crew available to move the train? They've got massive problems and delays themselves, even if they are allowed to crew an Amtrak train, CSX isn't going to torpedo their own operations just to help out Amtrak.

NS' blocking the Main with an outlawed train while KNOWING the PM was right behind it? Once more, ust how hard IS this counting to ten job, anyway? Again, 7,500 times to figure out a passenger train leaves at 5:40. Planning ahead would have saved NS money, again negating the "we don't make enough money off Amtrak to care" nonsense. As for not enough crews, well, some trains have a higher priority. One would think that with so much attention (finally) being devoted to late trains in Washington that NS would have sent out a crew ahead of time and said, "See? We don't have late train problems here!" And why is South Bend to Chicago still double track? There are ALWAYS three to five delayed freight trains just sitting there every time I ride the PM.

And while I'll agree with you that NS always seems to have big problems on the stretch of track through Indiana and into Illinois and Ohio, again at this particular time I'm sure that they were stretched thin on crews and didn't have one to send out to that train that died in front of the PM.

Additionally while I would agree that it isn't that hard to count to 12, not 10, when you're doing that for perhaps 20 or more trains, it does get a bit more complicated. And when you don't have enough crews for all of your trains because of the conditions, it doesn't really matter if you can count to 12. You could count to 100 for all the good it might do, but if you don't have an available crew, then it doesn't matter how high you can count.

Why they couldn't have made sure to get the PM around the dead train is another question and something definitely worth investigating.

And what a bunch of lame-o remarks about "somebody getting hurt and suing Amtrak." Sure, it's 10 degrees out, snow's two feet deep and still falling; let's all run out into traffic. We're quite capable of taking care of ourselves and keeping our little dears under control 'way out here. With the Mayor and Police Chief both being so concerned, I'm sure there would have been grownups there to watch everyone and keep them safe. Holland offered free food, free beds, and even free buses to Grand Rapids. And what about the cancer patient on board the train? Isn't that ALREADY a safety/liability issue? Surprise; the PM hauls a LOT of medical traffic. It has since the PM was run by the original PM.

I for can't believe that mid-westerner's are all that different that people elsewhere. I'm sure that there are many capable of taking care of themselves and their kids. But I'm also pretty sure that there are some parents out there who really aren't capable. We've all seen parents that when out in public situations are blissfully unaware of where their kids are and what their kids are doing. And it's those parents who will be the first to sue if their kid falls down while trying to exit the train, or runs out of the train station and gets hit by a car.

And what's with this bit about a cancer patient? First I've heard of it.

 

[AlanB]

And, to top it off, we pay extra for the "service". We get the same slipshod service for our 403b dollars as New York got for its Turbo contributions.

Michigan's story is vastly different that NY's story. Michigan pays far more to Amtrak for their service and a much greater perportion of Michigan's service is supported by the state. NY State basically gets a free ride from Amtrak, so they really have nothing to complain about. The Turbo idea was a bad idea right from the start and it never should have been agreed to. The Turbo was all about trying to provide jobs in the State and make it look like the politicians were actually doing something for their constituants.

So comparing the two is not fair at all. Michigan should be proud of what they do to keep Amtrak running in the state. NY has nothing to be proud of IMHO.

Amtrak is doing everything in their power to drive away their business and support, all while asking for more money to make up the difference. What happened to supply and demand? Provide what the customers want or lose your job.
That's how it works where I work, and I do a quality job every day for far, far less than these people make.

And I applaud you for that.

Wish it was that simple though. In far too many places it is very hard to find people who do have that work ethic.

 

[Guest_Yerry_*]

Ten Hours? Twelve? Shouldn't have posted at 3 AM. (others have made that statement too) But does that change anything? No.

I don't have much sympathy about the difficulty of someone's job when they make five, six, or seven times my salary. QA doesn't cut me any slack whatsoever, and as a taxpayer, it's okay for me to have a "bought and paid for" mentality.

But when a very large number of people point out the obvious and say, "The railroads shouldn't have done it that way", countering with "But that's the way they do it" isn't a very good defense.

I'm aware that the rule is absolute-- Congress and the ICC was sure railroads would attempt to circumvent it, which was why they put penalties on crews too, so the companies couldn't bully them. Compare this with trucking's drug-fueled schedule keeping reputation (not as deserved as many think) resulting in logs being frequently faked. Maybe we'll get a "When hauling people" clause out of this, but NOT howling about it won't fix things.

It is too fair to compare NY with MI. They have one thing in common: whether it was a good idea in the beginning or not, Amtrak squanders other states' money. Any state that takes part in 403b funding pays twice, and again, much of that money gets wasted. Route start-ups are another example. The Brighton Park turbo shed, 100+ MPH operation on the Michigan Line, yard bypass tracks in New Orleans and Newport News, etc.

But I still stand behind my comment of selectivity in when "get the facts in first" is applied. I recall one of my earliest posts here some years ago, where I was taken to task over a simple, low-interest mention of something in National Geographic. I was told I was patently wrong, misread the article, even NGM screwed up; all cited the "fact" that I hadn't registered. A month later, another post appears that says, "By golly, he was right", and miraculously, two posts disappear and the third was edited. All while, at the same time, the Nationwide Long-Haul Trainoff hoax was in full swing, with moderators defending the OP's blatant and repeated refusal to disclose his source, despite many demands that he do so. Shouldn't insistence of proof have been done the other way?

While it's nice to think only railfans know what's going on, ANY passenger can look out the window and see the underpowered, overloaded freight train FINALLY slog by after an hour wait. People actually ON a train aren't as stupid as some like to assume. We actually get good reporting here, compared to other cities; Grand Rapids Press pushes its staff to ride the train, frequently has editorials about the PM (most favorable), and NONE of them put the conductor at the throttle.

 

[AlanB]

I don't have much sympathy about the difficulty of someone's job when they make five, six, or seven times my salary. QA doesn't cut me any slack whatsoever, and as a taxpayer, it's okay for me to have a "bought and paid for" mentality.

And where did I say anything about how hard one's job is or isn't? :unsure:

But when a very large number of people point out the obvious and say, "The railroads shouldn't have done it that way", countering with "But that's the way they do it" isn't a very good defense.

It is a good defense if it's the law. Just because something makes perfect common sense doesn't mean that one should do it if it's against the law.

I'm aware that the rule is absolute-- Congress and the ICC was sure railroads would attempt to circumvent it, which was why they put penalties on crews too, so the companies couldn't bully them. Compare this with trucking's drug-fueled schedule keeping reputation (not as deserved as many think) resulting in logs being frequently faked. Maybe we'll get a "When hauling people" clause out of this, but NOT howling about it won't fix things.

I wouldn't want such a clause, as I'd fear that we'd end up with engineers working 14 or 15 hours and endangering lives.

It is too fair to compare NY with MI. They have one thing in common: whether it was a good idea in the beginning or not, Amtrak squanders other states' money. Any state that takes part in 403b funding pays twice, and again, much of that money gets wasted. Route start-ups are another example. The Brighton Park turbo shed, 100+ MPH operation on the Michigan Line, yard bypass tracks in New Orleans and Newport News, etc.

No it's not really as again, you were comparing a straight subsidy to operate trains to a joint venture to overhaul some old trains. Amtrak was an equal partner in this deal. They supplied parts for the Turboliners, they paid for some track improvements. NY dropped the ball by picking a company that went bankrupt to do the overhauls, which delayed the project by like two or three years. Years that might have seen the project's completion if NY hadn't picked a bad company to do the work. NY failed to fulfill many of it's obligations in the Turbo project, just like Amtrak failed to fulfill some of its obligations.

Michigan didn't do anything wrong in this incident.

But I still stand behind my comment of selectivity in when "get the facts in first" is applied. I recall one of my earliest posts here some years ago, where I was taken to task over a simple, low-interest mention of something in National Geographic. I was told I was patently wrong, misread the article, even NGM screwed up; all cited the "fact" that I hadn't registered. A month later, another post appears that says, "By golly, he was right", and miraculously, two posts disappear and the third was edited. All while, at the same time, the Nationwide Long-Haul Trainoff hoax was in full swing, with moderators defending the OP's blatant and repeated refusal to disclose his source, despite many demands that he do so. Shouldn't insistence of proof have been done the other way?

Ok, now I've had enough. :angry: Please get your facts straight and refrain from wild accusations. I went and found that topic in question. There are no posts where someone suggested that you should not be believed because you hadn't registered. You were never patently told you were wrong, I simply suggested that things might have changed since that photo was taken. But I also didn't say that you weren't right either.

Additionally there are no edited posts, because back then when anyone made an edit to their post, it showed at the bottom of the post that an edit was made. These days Anthony and I can edit a post without leaving a trace, but no one else can do that. And finally I've gone through the moderator logs from back at that time period. Yes, every action taken by a moderator is saved in a log and that log dates back to August 23, 2002. There were no deleted posts in that thread ever. I'll be happy to email you those logs if you want.

While it's nice to think only railfans know what's going on, ANY passenger can look out the window and see the underpowered, overloaded freight train FINALLY slog by after an hour wait. People actually ON a train aren't as stupid as some like to assume. We actually get good reporting here, compared to other cities; Grand Rapids Press pushes its staff to ride the train, frequently has editorials about the PM (most favorable), and NONE of them put the conductor at the throttle.

And I would agree that even the novice can pretty much figure that scenario out on their own. The hours of service rule, not so much unless you've first seen a story talking about it or someone has explained it to you. But regardless I don't believe that I ever said that anyone on the train was stupid, although the guy who jumped off in certainly in the running IMHO.

As for your newspapers out there, honestly how would I know that? You have to admit that in general though the news industries track record isn't great at getting the facts straight.

 

[MrFSS]

Amtrak Plans to Compensate for 11-Hour Delayed Train.

Full story is HERE.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Amtrak Plans to Compensate for 11-Hour Delayed Train.
Full story is HERE.

Fair enough.

But they keep acting like, of all people, the Amtrak crew left these people out to the dogs...

Again, the media not conveying the law and authority of the rails...

 

[ralfp]

But they keep acting like, of all people, the Amtrak crew left these people out to the dogs...

What does communicating status information about the train cost the crew (even if that information is: "Sorry, we know nothing.")? A minute of time. Status info, even if it does diddly squat for arriving on time, makes customers feel much better (it tells the customers that the crew gives a bleep). It also allows customers to make choices, such as getting off at an earlier station.

That, plus timing out a mile or so after leaving the station says that the crew knew they were screwing the passengers, but did not give a rat's gluteus maximus about it. They could have said "If you want to get off the train in the next few hours, do it now, because the next station stop will be a rail yard, and will be several hours long." They also could have told the dispatcher to "dispatch this", and not left the Holland station

The crew knew the law. They followed it, but did not consider its impact on the people they supposedly were serving. Unless I've got the facts wrong (please tell me I do), they don't give a damn about anyone besides themselves, but they're okay, because they're law-abiding.

Again, I hope I'm wrong about this. Please correct me.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

What does communicating status information about the train cost the crew (even if that information is: "Sorry, we know nothing.")? A minute of time. Status info, even if it does diddly squat for arriving on time, makes customers feel much better (it tells the customers that the crew gives a bleep). It also allows customers to make choices, such as getting off at an earlier station.

And they pax would never be satisfied even if they had explained it in the most intricate stance...

I must go with Alan and say we don't know all the facts, especially from the CSX side-- I don't think the crew knew they were going to time out a mere mile from Holland, I think there were other factors in play and it wasn't that simple.

I also do not believe they didn't consider the ramifications of their actions, they knew what was happened and weighed the two evils and made a decision based on the book.

As for "dispatch this"... well... thats just silly on so many levels.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

CSX interfered with the police that's obstructing justice and that is jail time right there. that yard attendant should be thrown in jail. i don't care what the signal says you don't move the train if 1 mile from the station the line is blocked with snow.the mayor needs to do something with CSX.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

Now the state of Michigan is involved in what happened.
Full story HERE.

Oh great, let's get the NTSB next!

why not. both amtrak and CSX recklessly endangered the lives of 100's of passengers for no reason.

 

[Everydaymatters]

What does communicating status information about the train cost the crew (even if that information is: "Sorry, we know nothing.")? A minute of time. Status info, even if it does diddly squat for arriving on time, makes customers feel much better (it tells the customers that the crew gives a bleep). It also allows customers to make choices, such as getting off at an earlier station.

I have been on a train which was late, and the crew knew it was going to be late, and when the crew finally did announce it would be late, they lied about how many hours. It's a long story on how I got my information, but it is a fact. Going back to what I said before, I think the crews have been through tough situations so many times that they are taking the easiest way out in order to keep their sanity. Had the crew told the passengers, they would have had 90 to 100 angry people to deal with.

As to the "when hauling people" claus, maybe I am taking this out of context. I take it to mean "when hauling people", the crew is allowed to do something outside of the 12 hour law??? If so, I'm all for it. Why not: "After 12 hours, when hauling people, the train may progress to the next station". "After 12 hours, when hauling people, freight trains must stop allowing the passenger train to progress to the next station." Properly written, it makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[daveyb99]

The defending of Amtrak, CSX and NS on this thread is simply ludicrous.

I do not see anyone here defending AMTRAK. I see train-wise people talking about operational FACTS, something apparently missing in this whole mess, and to counter to sensationalism by the press (which sells papers of course).

"Stranded on AMTRAK". What B***SH**. Those people were safe where they were. Maybe they did not have all the comforts of home, but they were safe and warm. Further, AMTRAK does not control CSX property, nor does the mayor or police chief. Maybe AMTRAK Ops did indeed try to get assistance to the train, but they too were denied by CSX.

But I can see the article now: "AMTRAK crew violates federal law, goes over time limits, backs up train without permission, and dumps passengers in a small station with no amenities or water or working restroom or food -- all in the middle of the night. Passengers left to fend for themselves without their luggage or ... ... Passengers sue".

Again, no one is defending AMTRAK, just making sure the FACTS get out.

 

[AlanB]

As to the "when hauling people" claus, maybe I am taking this out of context. I take it to mean "when hauling people", the crew is allowed to do something outside of the 12 hour law??? If so, I'm all for it. Why not: "After 12 hours, when hauling people, the train may progress to the next station". "After 12 hours, when hauling people, freight trains must stop allowing the passenger train to progress to the next station." Properly written, it makes a lot of sense to me.

And Betty for this example such a rule might just make sense, but please consider the following.

What if the next station is 3 or 4 hours away? Do you really want someone whose been awake for at least 14 or 15 hours driving your train for another 3 hours just to reach the next station? Do you trust him/her not to fall asleep at a critical moment and miss a signal?

Things are never quite as simple as we'd sometimes like to believe. Additionally, just to complicate things, there really are two rules for trains. If there are two people in the engine, then it's a 12 hour shift maximum. If there's only one, like in the case of the Pere, then the maximum hours are 8 on duty.

 

[daveyb99]

As to the "when hauling people" claus, maybe I am taking this out of context. I take it to mean "when hauling people", the crew is allowed to do something outside of the 12 hour law??? If so, I'm all for it. Why not: "After 12 hours, when hauling people, the train may progress to the next station". "After 12 hours, when hauling people, freight trains must stop allowing the passenger train to progress to the next station." Properly written, it makes a lot of sense to me.

And Betty for this example such a rule might just make sense, but please consider the following.

What if the next station is 3 or 4 hours away? Do you really want someone whose been awake for at least 14 or 15 hours driving your train for another 3 hours just to reach the next station? Do you trust him/her not to fall asleep at a critical moment and miss a signal?

Things are never quite as simple as we'd sometimes like to believe. Additionally, just to complicate things, there really are two rules for trains. If there are two people in the engine, then it's a 12 hour shift maximum. If there's only one, like in the case of the Pere, then the maximum hours are 8 on duty.

When I was watching History Channel 'Extreme Train', they covered the hours of service issue by citing a head-on collision between two trains carrying people where the engineer fell asleep.

If so, the hours were put into place, just because of 'hauling people'. And SAFETY.

 

[AlanB]

What does communicating status information about the train cost the crew (even if that information is: "Sorry, we know nothing.")? A minute of time. Status info, even if it does diddly squat for arriving on time, makes customers feel much better (it tells the customers that the crew gives a bleep). It also allows customers to make choices, such as getting off at an earlier station.

Ralf I don't disagree that it's not hard for the crew to say something and I certainly wouldn't argue that there are crews that don't make that minimum effort. I've been on trains that have sat for a half an hour without an announcement and I only knew what was going on thanks to my scanner. But I have also been on trains where the crew was making announcements, but because we were at the mercy of a dispatcher the crew really didn't know how long we were going to be sitting there.

And that wasn't good enough for some people. There are a few on every train that it seems as though nothing but a moving train is good enough for them. I'm sure that anyone whose been following these boards for a few years, or even just Amtrak in general remembers the Silver train from a few years ago that got stuck behind a derailment. I won't deny that both CSX and Amtrak screwed things up in that incident.

However, the media found several people who did nothing but complain that they were never told what was going on, that the train was out of everything almost immediately. One enterprising TV reporter however managed to find several people who discounted those horror tales. It wasn't widely broadcasted or printed, since that doesn't sell the news and hence the ads, but the majority of the people on the train did not fault the crew on the train. It was only a few hot headed people, most likely looking to sue, who seemed to have heard nothing and ate nothing.

Even in the current situation, there is one women running around posting in newspaper forums that the crew turned off the HEP to the train and was sitting safe and warm inside the train station. Not only do I not believe that a crew would do such a thing, that scenario is discounted by the fact that no one else on the train has told that story to anyone so far.

That, plus timing out a mile or so after leaving the station says that the crew knew they were screwing the passengers, but did not give a rat's gluteus maximus about it. They could have said "If you want to get off the train in the next few hours, do it now, because the next station stop will be a rail yard, and will be several hours long." They also could have told the dispatcher to "dispatch this", and not left the Holland station

As I pointed out to Yerry in my post, something is wrong with the math here. The engineer changed in Grand Rapids like normal, so he should have been on an 8 hour shift. I'm not sure about the conductors, they might well have been working on a 12 hour clock, or perhaps they too changed at Grand Rapids. However, if we assume that the crew was working on a 12 hour clock and we assume that the reported arrival time of 5:10 AM is correct, then the crew would have outlawed before arriving into Holland, not after Holland.

The crew must arrive before the train's departure, they don't just show up at 5:20 PM the scheduled departure time. I believe that they must be there 1 hour before departure, but there is a slight chance that it's a half an hour. Either way, 12 hours from either 4:20 or 4:50 means that the crew would have expired before a 5:10 AM arrival at Holland. Therefore I have to believe that the conductors also changed at Grand Rapids, along with the engineer. AFAIK, we don't know what time the train arrived at Grand Rapids, much less how long the replacement crew had been sitting there on the clock, so there is no way to know if the crew expired seconds after pulling into the yard or two hours after pulling into that yard. This is one set of facts that I'd like to see released before we start making judgements from our warm couches.

And OBS might correct me on this, but I believe that unless an engineer can see or predict an unsafe conditiion ahead, that he cannot refuse a dispatcher's order.

 

[AlanB]

CSX interfered with the police that's obstructing justice and that is jail time right there. that yard attendant should be thrown in jail. i don't care what the signal says you don't move the train if 1 mile from the station the line is blocked with snow.the mayor needs to do something with CSX.

Hardly. That is private property owned by CSX, the local police have no authority there unless called by CSX. And since CSX has its own police force, I'm not sure that the local cops have any jurisdiction. Just like a NYC cop cannnot go into New Jersey to arrest someone, unless they are in hot pursuit, local Holland cops can't enter CSX property without permission.

And the Mayor is totally powerless. CSX doesn't answer to him and there is nothing that the Mayor can do to change that. RR operate under Federal law, not state and local city laws.

 

[AlanB]

Now the state of Michigan is involved in what happened.
Full story HERE.

Oh great, let's get the NTSB next!

why not. both amtrak and CSX recklessly endangered the lives of 100's of passengers for no reason.

Just because someone is stuck on an unmoving train for several hours does not mean that their life was in any danger. Had Amtrak dropped them in a snow bank, that would be endangering their lives. Or had the crew moved the train after outlawing, that would have been endangering their lives.

 

[ThayerATM]

Again, I'm not really looking to point fingers, even though I did to some extent. But this is not a simple cut and dry matter, and we're missing too many facts at this point in time.

Alan,

I did some research tonight during the time I couldn't get on the "chat forum." <_<

It's beginning to look to me like that problem on the Pere Marquette last week was caused simply by the weather, and nobody (Amtrak/CSX) really knew what to do with each of the myriad of circumstances that sequentially came into play.

When events began to play out, everybody tossed their dog into the fight, and things became really confused.

If the Amtrak crew (subject to the 8/12 hour rules) is considered, there was pleanty of time for them to finish their run under normal circumstances. The weather caused abnormal circumstances. CSX would probably have allowed the Holland police access to the train under normal circumstances. But there's a high probability that CSX didn't have the snow removal equipment to get them there. And the Press?... They'll grab on to anything to sell a story. (read advertising)

Once the snow settles, it's my guess that almost everybody involved, at some point, made a poor decision to move that train out of Holland. Isn't that superb "Monday morning quarterbacking?" :unsure:

 

[MrFSS]

More stories about this incident.http://www.hollandsentinel.com/news/x2094351394/Amtrak-apologizes-for-delayed-train-trip

Amtrak apologizes for delayed train trip

Amtrak releases its side of what created 12 hour delay

MDOT: Amtrak didn't answer all questions about delayed train

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

I love how that "news" article is totally non specific. Based on the above releases from Amtrak-- they explained things very well.

 

[ralfp]

Hardly. That is private property owned by CSX, the local police have no authority there unless called by CSX. And since CSX has its own police force, I'm not sure that the local cops have any jurisdiction. Just like a NYC cop cannnot go into New Jersey to arrest someone, unless they are in hot pursuit, local Holland cops can't enter CSX property without permission.

The tracks are still in the town... the fact that it's private property should have no more bearing on local police than the local McD's franchise owner's property rights have on police accessing his franchise.

That is unless the right-of-way is specifically excluded from the town's and state's jurisdiction. Or are you saying that a local cop could not issue a citation for actions done within the right of way?

If 100+ people being held against their will for many hours (regardless of fault) doesn't merit police attention, what does?

 

[amtrakwolverine]

If 100+ people being held against their will for many hours (regardless of fault) doesn't merit police attention, what does?

amen to that. you got 100+ people being held aganst there will thats kidnapping. the employees that made this mess on both sides should be charged with un-lawfull confinement or face kidnapping charges. you got family's with kids

let me put it this way. your the dispatcher for CSX. you know that 1 mile out from the station the line is closed cause of the snow. do you tell amtrak to highball and have it get stuck in the snow stranding 100+ plus passengers because you hate amtrak are there passengers. that's reckless behavior on CSX's part. that dispacher + the amtrak crew should be fired

 

[AlanB]

Hardly. That is private property owned by CSX, the local police have no authority there unless called by CSX. And since CSX has its own police force, I'm not sure that the local cops have any jurisdiction. Just like a NYC cop cannnot go into New Jersey to arrest someone, unless they are in hot pursuit, local Holland cops can't enter CSX property without permission.

The tracks are still in the town... the fact that it's private property should have no more bearing on local police than the local McD's franchise owner's property rights have on police accessing his franchise.

That is unless the right-of-way is specifically excluded from the town's and state's jurisdiction. Or are you saying that a local cop could not issue a citation for actions done within the right of way?

I guess I should have been a bit clearer. If a local cop sees someone committing some crime on the ROW, he/she can indeed stop and issue a citation. Of course he/she best not be standing in the ROW while doing it, as any speeding train that might happen along isn't going to care what the officer is doing, it will hit them without regard. However a local cop cannot enforce FRA rules and regs and they cannot take any action that would prevent a train crew from doing their jobs or force the crew to do something that would be in violation of FRA rules. For example, the local police cannot order the crew to move the train back to the Holland station and while they might think that they have the right to detain the crew for not obeying such an order, they don't. They might get away with detaining the crew overnight, but once a judge gets involved the crew would be released the officer will get a slap on the wrist.

In this case, since no crime was being committed, I liken the police being denied access to my refusal to allow an officer into my home, assuming that they don't have a search warrant. However, I believe that the main reason that they were denied access IIRC, was that no path was plowed through the snow to the train.

Even if they had reached the train, I'm still pretty sure that the officers would have had no authority to order the crew to open the doors and allow the passengers to leave the train. And again, they certainly would have had no authority to order the crew to move the train.

 

[Ryan]

In this case, since no crime was being committed,

I think that this is the important bit to remember. Despite the claims that the passangers were "kidnapped" , the police really didn't have any reason to be involved.

 

[AlanB]

If 100+ people being held against their will for many hours (regardless of fault) doesn't merit police attention, what does?

amen to that. you got 100+ people being held aganst there will thats kidnapping. the employees that made this mess on both sides should be charged with un-lawfull confinement or face kidnapping charges. you got family's with kids

First let's be quite clear about this, what happened in Holland is not kidnapping. Kidnapping is being taken against one's will and then being held against one's will. The passengers on that train boarded the train of their own free will. No one forced them to get on that train. In fact, they paid money to get on the train.

Second, there are times and circumstances where people are forced to do something that they don't want to do. Case in point, I'm frequently forced to walk and/or drive down a different street than I want because some dignitary comes to town to visit the UN. It pisses me off to no end, especially since it is a direct violation of my right to go where I want, when I want. But there is nothing that I can do about that.

The fact that these people were unhappy sitting on that train is something that I understand and appreciate. But that still does not give them the right to open doors and jump off the train. In fact, they could well be jailed for that. If one tried that trick on an airplane, assuming that one actually survived, one would quickly find one's self in a Federal prison. Our society has rules and laws for a reason and it's not up to us to decide that we know better or that we don't have to obey them. If you don't like them, then vote to change them. Don't ignore and violate them.

Third, if one actually looks at the timeline, things become much clearer.

1. The crew had to pull the train down from the station because they were blocking the crossing, they couldn't remain where they where. I can just see it now, if they hadn't done that, we'd instead be talking about either the death of someone because the ambulance couldn't get to them or about someone's house being destroyed by fire because the trucks couldn't get to them. At the very least, instead of the police chief moaning about access to the train, he'd have probably sent a cruiser over to give the crew a ticket for blocking the crossing. This despite the fact that he has no authority to issue a ticket.
   
2. The decision to move to the yard before the crew expired was to make it easier for the relief crew to reach the train, since it couldn't stay in the station.
   
3. While passengers were on the train for over 12 hours, only 3 hours (2:55 to be exact), was spent sitting in the yard. They weren't in the yard for hours on end.
   
4. At all times the train kept heat and lights. Additionally while it would appear that TP started to disappear, the toilets were otherwise functional. I'm not sure that the station could have done better.
   
5. The emergency food and water kept on all Amtrak trains was given out. I'm sure that some people didn't think that sufficient and were upset the all the food in the cafe car was not being given away. But no one was forced to starve because they had no money, unless they choose to not eat what was provided.
   
6. Buses were never an option thanks to road conditions.
   
7. Everyone, except for the idiot that jumped off, did get where they were supposed to go, even if it was hours late. Had they gone by bus or plane, they would have been far worse off than they actually were IMHO. Consider the Jet Blue incident from a few years ago where they had no food and went no where.
   

Now all that said, could Amtrak have done things better. I'm sure that they could have. Heck, even they admit that communications with the public were horrible. And now in hindsight they might well have done other things differently too, given a do over.

But at no time was anyone's life ever in danger and it would appear that the crew did every thing by the book. It's only thanks to a series of natural events triggered by the freezing cold weather and the snow, that this is even an issue.

let me put it this way. your the dispatcher for CSX. you know that 1 mile out from the station the line is closed cause of the snow. do you tell amtrak to highball and have it get stuck in the snow stranding 100+ plus passengers because you hate amtrak are there passengers. that's reckless behavior on CSX's part. that dispacher + the amtrak crew should be fired

See my comments above as to why the train was moved and everyone made the correct decisions for the circumstances. I'm quite certain that there will be no firings over this one.