I was reading through the introduction of my "Railway Engineering and Maintenance Cyclopedia - 1929" and came across the following paragraph. It would fit perfectly in with just about any business today.
"Particular attention as also been given during the past five years to the exonomics of railway labor with a view to offsetting by higher efficiency the 100 percent (!)increase in the cost of labor since 1917, along with the 50 per cent in crease in the cost of materials. The problem as been greatly complicated by the shorter working day (I wonder what it was in 1929...), which is specially adverse in roadway and track repairs, since forces so engaged lose a large percentage of the day in unproductive transportation to and from their work."
It goes on to talk about using units of measure, good organization, "labor saving devices", to increase labor efficiency and also the consideration of the welfare of the laborers to avoid unnecessary turnover. The entire introduction is fascinating, but this stood out because they are concerns that you hear on the news as well as in supervisory /management meetings to this day.
The more they stay the same.
Matt Goodman
Interesting and good observations. It seems that people in the past were dealing with similar issues to us but perhaps on a smaller scale? Rob
Hmmmmm! It's been said ...
"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it!"
... or something like that.
Fluesheet Wrote:"Particular attention as also been given during the past five years to the exonomics of railway labor with a view to offsetting by higher efficiency the 100 percent (!)increase in the cost of labor since 1917, along with the 50 per cent in crease in the cost of materials. The problem as been greatly complicated by the shorter working day (I wonder what it was in 1929...), which is specially adverse in roadway and track repairs, since forces so engaged lose a large percentage of the day in unproductive transportation to and from their work."
Most Americans worked 12-14 hours days back then, one of the main reasons was immigration, and well people didn't complain like they do these days.
It wasn't til the late 30's when the fair labor standards labor act was put in for the 40hr work week.
Fluesheet Wrote:The more they stay the same.
Making money the cheapest way possible will never change
but there are several things that did change and for the better, like safety because of standards like OSHA, MSHA, etc..
tomustang Wrote:<snip>. but there are several things that did change and for the better, like safety because of standards like OSHA, MSHA, etc..
I think safety/lawsuits/lawyers have as much to do with the shorter working day. Doesn't FRA require 12 hour maximum shift for all railroad personnel? I don't think I would want an engineer driving a train through my town who was on the clock for longer than 12 hours. In fact, I don't know if I would want one who has been on the shift for 10 hours. same goes with the person flying my plane or driving my taxi. I've worked a 12 hour shift before, and that became a 15-16 hour shift with travel time. Work those shifts for 10 or more days in a row, and the lack of sleep catches up with you. I wound up getting yelled at for falling asleep on the job, getting a traffic ticket for sleeping while driving, and making (or not making) a few jobsite decisions that could have been costly. I argued with my employer that they need to have some kind of hours of service policy before they get sued. They thought that was not possible, so I quit.
Kevin & All; the regs are 12 hours maximum continuous/total time on duty for a tour of duty (with some modifying circumstances/conditions), but the HOS law once allowed 14 hours, and even earlier, 16 hours of duty time, and your "deadhead transportation time" (often on the train you worked for 16 hours before recrew), counted as "rest" for your next assignment...Iron Men, indeed ! Bob C.
nachoman Wrote:tomustang Wrote:<snip>. but there are several things that did change and for the better, like safety because of standards like OSHA, MSHA, etc..
I think safety/lawsuits/lawyers have as much to do with the shorter working day. Doesn't FRA require 12 hour maximum shift for all railroad personnel? I don't think I would want an engineer driving a train through my town who was on the clock for longer than 12 hours. In fact, I don't know if I would want one who has been on the shift for 10 hours. same goes with the person flying my plane or driving my taxi. I've worked a 12 hour shift before, and that became a 15-16 hour shift with travel time. Work those shifts for 10 or more days in a row, and the lack of sleep catches up with you. I wound up getting yelled at for falling asleep on the job, getting a traffic ticket for sleeping while driving, and making (or not making) a few jobsite decisions that could have been costly. I argued with my employer that they need to have some kind of hours of service policy before they get sued. They thought that was not possible, so I quit.
Lawsuits and lawyers weren't common like they are in today's standards, the govt stood in and made the changes, equality and such, minimum wage, hours, OT, child laboring
Unions are very different and don't hold the same as non unions. So is transportation, if you look at truck driving the have more paperwork than an office does
they also have time limits on how much mileage/hours they can run.
Matt,One thing we need to remember is back then the railroads and railroad unions was a force to be reckon with.The days of cheap slave labor and long work days was over its demise started with the railroad shop and track workers strike of 1877 which was filled with violence(both sides was equally guilty) that lead to many deaths including women and children gunned down by State militia..It took Federal troops to restore order and end the violence..Of course the railroad/union battle would rage on several more years before better working conditions was won by the crafts unions and by the 20s a shop men could enjoy a 8-10 hour work day with regular days off-depending on the company/union work agreement set forth in their contract..Of course the track men,building and bridge gangs could travel miles before their pay started.Here's the rub..These workers was on the job 10-14 hours(depending on distance traveled) and was getting paid 8 hours.
So,the railroads wanted to find ways to cut cost and that meant cutting jobs if possible by modernization..Also note the railroads could no longer cut the employees pay with every sour business wind that blew.This was the bases of the 1877 strike.
To bring this back to the original subject-
That saying definitely applies here. I view one of the major societal conflicts as between the haves and the have nots. That is no less true today as when that excerpt was published in 1929. When researching for my railroad, I always find it curious when I run into a tidbit or news article that could have been written last week, but is instead 100 years old.
nachoman Wrote:When researching for my railroad, I always find it curious when I run into a tidbit or news article that could have been written last week, but is instead 100 years old.
This has been an interesting conversation, but nachoman, you have hit my nail on the head.
Regarding improved labor conditions, it's apparent that management is no longer treating labor as disposable with the additional comment in my original post: "the consideration of the welfare of the laborers to avoid unnecessary turnover."
Granted, it's a business case (avoiding the expense of turnover), but with a benefit to the worker as well.
Matt
Funny, in a way, because originally the railroads kept track crews stationed at close intervals to immediately deal with the problems that arose. The real problem was wages for those crews, not a shortage of labor, and since 1929 was the year of the Stock Market Crash and The Great Depression, it seems that that should not have been a problem, either.
MountainMan Wrote:Funny, in a way, because originally the railroads kept track crews stationed at close intervals to immediately deal with the problems that arose. The real problem was wages for those crews, not a shortage of labor, and since 1929 was the year of the Stock Market Crash and The Great Depression, it seems that that should not have been a problem, either.
Indeed..
However..
That was mighty costly maintaining that many track and B&B gangs-PRR had one track and B&B gangs for every 50 miles not including upkeep on camp cars and meals for these men while they was away from home on extended track projects.The crash of '29 brought a hiring freeze because nobody was throwing down their tools and walking off the job since jobs was scarce -1 in every 3 factory worker was laid off-then there was the downturn in freight car loadings.
Labor was dirt cheap - that's why so much of it was used. It was so cheap, that railroads avoided mechanization which was more costly.
Quote:Most Americans worked 12-14 hours days back then, one of the main reasons was immigration, and well people didn't complain like they do these days.
It wasn't til the late 30's when the fair labor standards labor act was put in for the 40hr work week.
Yes, one of the 'benefits' of the CCC was the 6-8 hour work day, three squares a day, regular pay, consistent structure and so much more. Many of these men had been hobos and dust bowl farmers who were glad to not have to panhandle and beg anymore. Hoboing was dangerous and far from glamourous.
People complained about alot back then, but honest work for honest pay wasn't one of the things they complained about. That was a good thing to be proud of. Nobody liked working too hard for too little.
My grandfather, born in 1914, went to work right out of high school for a section gang on the N&W. He worked hard and moved up eventually to a car inspector before he retired, 40 years later. After retiring from the railroad he went to work for a few different little steam powered theme park railroads (Gold Rush/Silver Dollar City, and Tweetsie RR in Boone, NC) for another 10 years. He's 96 and still sharp, although he has to use a walker to get around.
Railroad workers did have longer days, but even though he worked third shift my grandfather was glad to have regular hours - not like folks on the call board. Eventually he was able to work days and that was much better. He enjoyed the respect and admiration of his coworkers. The railroad job was critical during the war so he served his country by doing what he did for the railroad.
Galen
ocalicreek Wrote:Quote:Most Americans worked 12-14 hours days back then, one of the main reasons was immigration, and well people didn't complain like they do these days.
It wasn't til the late 30's when the fair labor standards labor act was put in for the 40hr work week.
Yes, one of the 'benefits' of the CCC was the 6-8 hour work day, three squares a day, regular pay, consistent structure and so much more. Many of these men had been hobos and dust bowl farmers who were glad to not have to panhandle and beg anymore. Hoboing was dangerous and far from glamourous.
People complained about alot back then, but honest work for honest pay wasn't one of the things they complained about. That was a good thing to be proud of. Nobody liked working too hard for too little.
My grandfather, born in 1914, went to work right out of high school for a section gang on the N&W. He worked hard and moved up eventually to a car inspector before he retired, 40 years later. After retiring from the railroad he went to work for a few different little steam powered theme park railroads (Gold Rush/Silver Dollar City, and Tweetsie RR in Boone, NC) for another 10 years. He's 96 and still sharp, although he has to use a walker to get around.
Railroad workers did have longer days, but even though he worked third shift my grandfather was glad to have regular hours - not like folks on the call board. Eventually he was able to work days and that was much better. He enjoyed the respect and admiration of his coworkers. The railroad job was critical during the war so he served his country by doing what he did for the railroad.
Galen
You must be talking about a much different CCC than the one my father was in. He never had a 6 hour workday in the CCC, let alone even an 8 hour one, and usually only got two meals a day. The pay was $ 1.00 per day, and half of that had to be sent home to family, by law. The work was in the Sierra Mountains, hot and dry in the summer and brutally cold in the winter.