Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Digest Number 818

Expand Messages
  • marionm122@aol.com
    Also consider this, with passenger s tempers flaring because the CA&E had ceased operations and would not, could not deliver them to their destinations, I
    Message 1 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012
      Also consider this, with passenger's tempers flaring because the CA&E had ceased operations and would not, could not deliver them to their destinations, I doubt very seriously if any conductor, motorman, or any other employee would take the time to wave bye-bye for the camera in front of all those irate passengers who had no way to get home.
    • Milton Lemke
      Right on!  Can someone please, if they can, explain to me why the CAE didn t, or couldn t, finish their job of commuting and getting these folks home?  The
      Message 2 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012
        Right on!  Can someone please, if they can, explain to me why the CAE didn't, or couldn't, finish their job of commuting and getting these folks home?  The next day of course was the 4th of July, perhaps they could of posted a notice or something stating that there will be no service on July 4th,

        --- On Thu, 7/5/12, marionm122@... <marionm122@...> wrote:

        From: marionm122@... <marionm122@...>
        Subject: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
        To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 4:48 PM

         
        Also consider this, with passenger's tempers flaring because the CA&E had ceased operations and would not, could not deliver them to their destinations, I doubt very seriously if any conductor, motorman, or any other employee would take the time to wave bye-bye for the camera in front of all those irate passengers who had no way to get home.
      • Scott Greig
        Like I said, the name of the game for the railroad, once the court s control expired, was to shut the service down and keep it from being resumed before
        Message 3 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012
          Like I said, the name of the game for the railroad, once the court's control expired, was to shut the service down and keep it from being resumed before somebody could find another sympathetic judge to force the railroad to continue the service.

          --- On Thu, 7/5/12, Milton Lemke <lemkejr@...> wrote:

          From: Milton Lemke <lemkejr@...>
          Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
          To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 12:23 PM



          Right on!  Can someone please, if they can, explain to me why the CAE didn't, or couldn't, finish their job of commuting and getting these folks home?  The next day of course was the 4th of July, perhaps they could of posted a notice or something stating that there will be no service on July 4th,

          --- On Thu, 7/5/12, marionm122@... <marionm122@...> wrote:

          From: marionm122@... <marionm122@...>
          Subject: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
          To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 4:48 PM

           
          Also consider this, with passenger's tempers flaring because the CA&E had ceased operations and would not, could not deliver them to their destinations, I doubt very seriously if any conductor, motorman, or any other employee would take the time to wave bye-bye for the camera in front of all those irate passengers who had no way to get home.


        • Mitchell Markovitz
          My opinion is they couldn t have cared less. The era of good service that was an Insull hallmark, and I believe the one we all believe in deep down inside, was
          Message 4 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012

            My opinion is they couldn't have cared less. The era of good service that was an Insull hallmark, and I believe the one we all believe in deep down inside, was over. Period.

            The line had been wanting this moment for years. Now they had it. They had to shut the thing down right now. If they stayed open until perhaps 8pm someone could have found a judge to overturn the order, or to get an executive ruling.

            It's my opinion that in the reconstruction of the Desplaines Terminal in 1953 the severance had to be final, with no connection whatsoever between the companies (CA&E-CTA.) The same holds true, in part, with the Westchester Line. There was the situation where the Chicago politics dictated the City not subsidize an "L" line in the suburbs. But had that not been an issue, or someone raised the point about the Evanston Line, or Douglas (although mostly still Cook County) a connection at Desplaines would have been mandatory and problematic in terms of the shut down of the CA&E..

            Mitch


            Mitch Markovitz, www.mitchmarkovitz.com 574.772.7939

          • David Mummery
            One could also assume there was no night or weekend court back then, which allowed them to get all the equipment off the property by July 5th. Dave Dave
            Message 5 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012
              One could also assume there was no night or weekend court back then, which allowed them to get all the equipment off the property by July 5th.
              Dave

              Dave Mummery

              http://27squaresof220ing.blogspot.com/
              http://tractionmadness.blogspot.com/

              Sent from my U.S. Cellular BlackBerry® smartphone

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Scott Greig <sbgreig_m1@...>
              Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 17:26:33
              To: <thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com>
              Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818

               




              Like I said, the name of the game for the railroad, once the court's control expired, was to shut the service down and keep it from being resumed before somebody could find another sympathetic judge to force the railroad to continue the service.

              --- On Thu, 7/5/12, Milton Lemke <lemkejr@...> wrote:

              From: Milton Lemke <lemkejr@...>
              Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
              To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
              Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 12:23 PM






              Right on!  Can someone please, if they can, explain to me why the CAE didn't, or couldn't, finish their job of commuting and getting these folks home?  The next day of course was the 4th of July, perhaps they could of posted a notice or something stating that there will be no service on July 4th,

              --- On Thu, 7/5/12, marionm122@... <marionm122@...> wrote:

              From: marionm122@... <marionm122@...>
              Subject: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
              To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
              Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 4:48 PM



               


              Also consider this, with passenger's tempers flaring because the CA&E had ceased operations and would not, could not deliver them to their destinations, I doubt very seriously if any conductor, motorman, or any other employee would take the time to wave bye-bye for the camera in front of all those irate passengers who had no way to get home.
            • Scott Greig
              All of the equipment had been parked at Wheaton by that afternoon.  It was the means to operate passenger service--the transportation department--that was
              Message 6 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012
                All of the equipment had been parked at Wheaton by that afternoon.  It was the means to operate passenger service--the transportation department--that was eliminated on the 5th.

                --- On Thu, 7/5/12, David Mummery <d_mummery@...> wrote:

                From: David Mummery <d_mummery@...>
                Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
                To: "thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com " <thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com>
                Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 12:37 PM

                One could also assume there was no night or weekend court back then, which allowed them to get all the equipment off the property by July 5th.
                Dave

                Dave Mummery

                http://27squaresof220ing.blogspot.com/
                http://tractionmadness.blogspot.com/

                Sent from my U.S. Cellular BlackBerry® smartphone

                -----Original Message-----
                From: Scott Greig <sbgreig_m1@...>
                Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 17:26:33
                To: <thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com>
                Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818

                 




                Like I said, the name of the game for the railroad, once the court's control expired, was to shut the service down and keep it from being resumed before somebody could find another sympathetic judge to force the railroad to continue the service.

                --- On Thu, 7/5/12, Milton Lemke <lemkejr@...> wrote:

                From: Milton Lemke <lemkejr@...>
                Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
                To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
                Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 12:23 PM






                Right on!  Can someone please, if they can, explain to me why the CAE didn't, or couldn't, finish their job of commuting and getting these folks home?  The next day of course was the 4th of July, perhaps they could of posted a notice or something stating that there will be no service on July 4th,

                --- On Thu, 7/5/12, marionm122@... <marionm122@...> wrote:

                From: marionm122@... <marionm122@...>
                Subject: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
                To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
                Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 4:48 PM



                 


                Also consider this, with passenger's tempers flaring because the CA&E had ceased operations and would not, could not deliver them to their destinations, I doubt very seriously if any conductor, motorman, or any other employee would take the time to wave bye-bye for the camera in front of all those irate passengers who had no way to get home.






                ------------------------------------

                Yahoo! Groups Links

                <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thegreatthirdrail/

                <*> Your email settings:
                    Individual Email | Traditional

                <*> To change settings online go to:
                    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thegreatthirdrail/join
                    (Yahoo! ID required)

                <*> To change settings via email:
                    thegreatthirdrail-digest@yahoogroups.com
                    thegreatthirdrail-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

                <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    thegreatthirdrail-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

              • Scott Greig
                They may have had the Insull legacy in their past, but the management at Wheaton were businessmen first and foremost.  One of the prime directives of business
                Message 7 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012
                  They may have had the Insull legacy in their past, but the management at Wheaton were businessmen first and foremost.  One of the prime directives of business is not to lose money, and to eliminate the sources of losses as soon as possible.  The railroad was losing money every day that the courts were forcing them to provide passenger service, the management saw no way to make it profitable again, and they seized the first opportunity to stop the money hemorrhage the moment they weren't being forced to provide it.

                  --- On Thu, 7/5/12, Mitchell Markovitz <art.mark@...> wrote:

                  From: Mitchell Markovitz <art.mark@...>
                  Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
                  To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 12:34 PM



                  My opinion is they couldn't have cared less. The era of good service that was an Insull hallmark, and I believe the one we all believe in deep down inside, was over. Period.

                  The line had been wanting this moment for years. Now they had it. They had to shut the thing down right now. If they stayed open until perhaps 8pm someone could have found a judge to overturn the order, or to get an executive ruling.

                  It's my opinion that in the reconstruction of the Desplaines Terminal in 1953 the severance had to be final, with no connection whatsoever between the companies (CA&E-CTA.) The same holds true, in part, with the Westchester Line. There was the situation where the Chicago politics dictated the City not subsidize an "L" line in the suburbs. But had that not been an issue, or someone raised the point about the Evanston Line, or Douglas (although mostly still Cook County) a connection at Desplaines would have been mandatory and problematic in terms of the shut down of the CA&E..

                  Mitch


                  Mitch Markovitz, www.mitchmarkovitz.com 574.772.7939



                • Mitchell Markovitz
                  There still had to be some of the transportation department to operate freight. Mitch Mitch Markovitz, www.mitchmarkovitz.com 574.772.7939
                  Message 8 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012

                    There still had to be some of the transportation department to operate freight.

                    Mitch


                    Mitch Markovitz, www.mitchmarkovitz.com 574.772.7939

                  • David Sadowski
                    I have to wonder if CTA s abandonment of the Westchester branch in 1951 was part of a larger bargain between CTA and CA&E. While Westchester ran, CTA trains
                    Message 9 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012
                      I have to wonder if CTA's abandonment of the Westchester branch in
                      1951 was part of a larger bargain between CTA and CA&E. While
                      Westchester ran, CTA trains picked up the passengers and got the
                      revenue from some suburban stops as far west as Bellwood. Once
                      Westechester service stopped, CA&E trains began making those stops
                      again and got the revenue.

                      The original plan was to do the handoff between CA&E and CTA at
                      Laramie, where CA&E's tracks ended. But eventually, they agreed to do
                      it at Des Plaines instead, which was an advantage to CA&E, since it
                      reduced the overall mileage they needed to operate.

                      CA&E and Cook County owned the Des Plaines terminal, and apparently
                      there was no formal agreement with the CTA in the early 1950s over
                      their operations there. So in early 1957, when it looked like the
                      state would not pay them the money they wanted, CA&E threatened to
                      evict CTA as a tenant there. These plans were of course shelved when
                      the railroad was allowed to cease passenger service and the state met
                      their price for the river crossing.

                      Highway funds could not be used to buy the terminal and it could not
                      be condemned for the highway either, since that land was not going to
                      be used for a highway. But purchasing the terminal did save the city
                      of Chicago $1.8m since otherwise, they would have been required to
                      build a ramp connecting the Congress median line with the old Laramie
                      yard.
                    • Scott Greig
                      What I was told was that they kept the top two guys off the motormans and conductors seniority lists to run the freight, and everybody else was out the door.
                      Message 10 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012
                        What I was told was that they kept the top two guys off the motormans' and conductors' seniority lists to run the freight, and everybody else was out the door.

                        --- On Thu, 7/5/12, Mitchell Markovitz <art.mark@...> wrote:

                        From: Mitchell Markovitz <art.mark@...>
                        Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
                        To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
                        Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 12:54 PM



                        There still had to be some of the transportation department to operate freight.

                        Mitch


                        Mitch Markovitz, www.mitchmarkovitz.com 574.772.7939



                      • David Sadowski
                        Does anyone know what the date of the last fantrip was? 1959 perhaps?
                        Message 11 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012
                          Does anyone know what the date of the last fantrip was? 1959 perhaps?
                        • Mitchell Markovitz
                          In looking at Julie Johnson s site there were 2 regular assignments that required 3 men, and 1 each extra board men for motorman, conductor, and brakeman.
                          Message 12 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012

                            In looking at Julie Johnson's site there were 2 regular assignments that required 3 men, and 1 each extra board men for motorman, conductor, and brakeman. there probably was a small reserve list as well.

                            But there still had to be dispatchers, trainmasters, a superintendent, and a cranky chief clerk to tell you they were all out of a certain form that needed to be filled out. This is all part of the transportation department.

                            Mitch


                            Mitch Markovitz, www.mitchmarkovitz.com 574.772.7939

                          • Scott Greig
                            Okay, so perhaps it was a bit much to say the transportation department was eliminated.  Main thing is, by the end of that week the bulk of the crewmen that
                            Message 13 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012
                              Okay, so perhaps it was a bit much to say "the transportation department" was eliminated.  Main thing is, by the end of that week the bulk of the crewmen that would have been operating passenger trains had been let go, so CA&E could plausibly make the case it was no longer possible for them to operate passenger service, even if they were ordered to by the courts.

                              --- On Thu, 7/5/12, Mitchell Markovitz <art.mark@...> wrote:

                              From: Mitchell Markovitz <art.mark@...>
                              Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
                              To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
                              Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 2:05 PM



                              In looking at Julie Johnson's site there were 2 regular assignments that required 3 men, and 1 each extra board men for motorman, conductor, and brakeman. there probably was a small reserve list as well.

                              But there still had to be dispatchers, trainmasters, a superintendent, and a cranky chief clerk to tell you they were all out of a certain form that needed to be filled out. This is all part of the transportation department.

                              Mitch


                              Mitch Markovitz, www.mitchmarkovitz.com 574.772.7939



                            • Jonathan Stevens
                              My grandfather was #2 I believe on the motorman s seniority list and ran freight until the end. Jon From: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
                              Message 14 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012

                                My grandfather was #2 I believe on the motorman’s seniority list and ran freight until the end.

                                 

                                Jon

                                 

                                From: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com [mailto:thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Scott Greig
                                Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 1:11 PM
                                To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818

                                 

                                 

                                What I was told was that they kept the top two guys off the motormans' and conductors' seniority lists to run the freight, and everybody else was out the door.

                                --- On Thu, 7/5/12, Mitchell Markovitz <art.mark@...> wrote:


                                From: Mitchell Markovitz <art.mark@...>
                                Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
                                To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
                                Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 12:54 PM

                                 

                                There still had to be some of the transportation department to operate freight.

                                Mitch

                                Mitch Markovitz, www.mitchmarkovitz.com 574.772.7939

                                 

                              • Scott Greig
                                I really wish I d gotten the name of that motorman I met back in 1995.  He clearly wasn t a railfan, and it showed in how he explained things.  Really
                                Message 15 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012
                                  I really wish I'd gotten the name of that motorman I met back in 1995.  He clearly wasn't a railfan, and it showed in how he explained things.  Really interesting.

                                  --- On Thu, 7/5/12, Jonathan Stevens <jonathan.stevens@...> wrote:

                                  From: Jonathan Stevens <jonathan.stevens@...>
                                  Subject: RE: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
                                  To: "thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com" <thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com>
                                  Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 4:12 PM



                                  My grandfather was #2 I believe on the motorman’s seniority list and ran freight until the end.

                                   

                                  Jon

                                   

                                  From: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com [mailto:thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Scott Greig
                                  Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 1:11 PM
                                  To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
                                  Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818

                                   

                                   

                                  What I was told was that they kept the top two guys off the motormans' and conductors' seniority lists to run the freight, and everybody else was out the door.

                                  --- On Thu, 7/5/12, Mitchell Markovitz <art.mark@...> wrote:


                                  From: Mitchell Markovitz <art.mark@...>
                                  Subject: Re: [thegreatthirdrail] Re: Digest Number 818
                                  To: thegreatthirdrail@yahoogroups.com
                                  Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 12:54 PM

                                   

                                  There still had to be some of the transportation department to operate freight.

                                  Mitch

                                  Mitch Markovitz, www.mitchmarkovitz.com 574.772.7939

                                   



                                • Mitchell Markovitz
                                  Not having enough men would have been an impedance to restarting service. someone would have known that the men would have been happy to come back in a 3 day
                                  Message 16 of 18 , Jul 5, 2012

                                    Not having enough men would have been an impedance to restarting service. someone would have known that the men would have been happy to come back in a 3 day notice. The men were furloughed or layed off so they could get their benefits if that applied back in those days.

                                    Mitch


                                    Mitch Markovitz, www.mitchmarkovitz.com 574.772.7939

                                  • insullmagnate
                                    ... Yes, anyone on the CA & E (including shopmen, office workers) would have been paying into Railroad Retirement, which included unemployment benefits for a
                                    Message 17 of 18 , Jul 7, 2012
                                      >Not having enough men would have been an impedance to restarting >service. someone would have known that the men would have been happy >to come back in a 3 day notice. The men were furloughed or layed off >so they could get their benefits if that applied back in those days.
                                      >
                                      >Mitch

                                      Yes, anyone on the CA & E (including shopmen, office workers) would have been paying into Railroad Retirement, which included unemployment benefits for a while. So most should have received some sort of unemployment benefits. Little consolation, I suspect.

                                      The CA & E, the CNS & M, and the CSS & SB were covered by the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (RUIA) since 1937, although the companies paid the payroll taxes under protest and fought the classification as common carriers regulated by the ICC and the RRB during 1937-1939-ish. The South Shore's lawsuit, "Shannahan vs. U.S.," went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court by 1938, where the high court ruled the company was a railroad, not an interurban disconnected from the common carrier system.

                                      Martin Tuohy
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.