Yes John...I did...Said activity was required of all officers...So many "efficiency tests" had to be turned in every month..I think it was 20 on the CRIP.
One thing that always bothered me about testing was that it seemed always necessary to "go get a bottle" for consumption by the "testors"...Seemed to me it would have been, shall we say, awkward should the testors encounter a Rule G violation.. Since I didn't "imbibe" it would not have affected me, and fortunately that thing never happened although a good friend of mine while working for another railroad after the RI shut down did "get caught" and lost his job as an officer of that RR.
Pete
-----Original Message-----
From: John D. Mitchell, Jr. <cbqrr47@yahoo.com>
To: CBQ <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, Aug 21, 2012 10:50 am
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Fwd: Fire Insurance
Another thing fire insurance was good for was for the victims of "efficiency tests" and we know about them, don't we Pete? Did you ever "hide in the weeds"?
One aspect of this kind of insurance is injuries. Railroad employees are not subject to state worker's compensation laws. They have the "Federal Employers Liability Act" or "FELA". This act provides that if there is a contest as to fault or extent of the injury that you have to sue the railroad in court and of course that can take years.
Leo-
Could you explain more what happened? I believe you are describing a setout on the IHB interchange track south of the Eastbound main. How did the train handling result in the damage?
Charlie Vlk
When we stopped at Congress Park to s/o he used a lot of independent as he had used the train line earlier. My partner made the cut and they pulled ahead spreading the mainline rail all the way to Maple Ave. Long story short the evening dinky parade was a mess and we all received the letter about" to determine your responsbility concerning the incident at Congress Park on ".