As someone who has been doing

As someone who has been doing ops for many years, I'm very used to 1 man crews. 

When you put someone under a buddy system,  make sure that the senior guy is actually qualified.  One of the most frustrating experiences is when your "mentor" is not up to snuff on operations,  it has happened to me a few times.  

Working with someone that is not up to speed that is supposed to be your trainer is about one of the worst experiences ever during operations.   At one point I actually had to ask the guy who just got us into a huge bind,  train hung out on the main, engine wedged behind a cut of cars on the wrong end of the lead and holding up the entire railroad.  Around 5 trains (10 plus people) waiting to get past our location, dispatcher on the radio asking when will we clear etc.

He was very frustrated and I was the same just watching him dig us deeper into a hole as I ran the engine back and forth under his commands, Something that should of taken around 15 minutes to do we were into it for almost 45 minutes I ended up just asking may I take over,  at that point I was able to clear everything up in around 8 minutes got the main reopened etc.   

In reality I do not need a handler in most cases.   But in some cases like a Spaghetti mess I operated on,  then absolutely yes, I need help with someone who knows the railroad.  You need to take this turnout to get to this track do a full loop around here to get over to that location cross over to this track etc. etc.

I hope that most owners realize or ask for the skill levels of said operators,  Granted I do not go to out of state operation events,  beyond my family budget.  But the guys that do pay hundreds of dollars to do this and get placed in a roll of observer or throttle jockey etc.   So take into account the a system of seniority for people that travel and pay to operate is not a good match. 

I can see using this in our local groups as the cost to operators is less than a tank of gas to reach most any layout in our area and you have more opportunity to operate every month vs once a year or every other year etc.

Fun vs keeping score

Interesting idea, but it runs a very real danger of sucking the fun out of a session.  And I’m not sure I’d want to be score keeper

Not seniority

Its not actually "seniority" per se since seniority is determined by time or number of events, at least in railroad terms.  This is more of a performance measure, you advance if you perform properly, you are restricted if you perform poorly.

A seniority system is if you have been to 27 operating or work sessions, you are ahead of somebody who has been to 25 operating or work sessions or if you first participated in Session #15, you are ahead of somebody who first participated in Session #22.

In any case doesn't sound like it would fun for anybody involved in it.

What happens when brownies exceed whiskers?

Some people would never get any seniority if they got dinged for each failing.  And some "service failures" have multiple culprits.  How do you apportion blame?

Scott Chatfield

Call it what it is -- a

Call it what it is -- a merit/demerit system. It's not seniority. True seniority would give operators their choice of "jobs" depending on "time in service" on a particular layout.

One option that is pointed out is that sufficient demerits in a particular "job" might earn an operator "time off" from that "job" until they had accrued enough brownie points to bid back to it.

I began to join a model

I began to join a model railroad club in the far west (no need to be more specific) which had a series of rankings, beginning with (IIRC) gandy dancer, up to switchman, and ultimately to Senior Engineer, and after that, Dispatcher.  When I realized that it would be YEARS before I could even aspire to being a brakeman, or conductor, or engineer, I lost interest right away in playing that game.  I moved (unrelated) to the East Coast, and do not regret my choice not to play the game.  I'm in a club now where all operators that have been to a few sessions are treated like adults and as capable operators . . . until they demonstrate otherwise.
Summary, I'd not be at your sessions, Joe, if you implemented this practice, I'd go elsewhere.

Our round robin group resets seniority every session............

The only person that gets "seniority" each session is the person who dispatched the last session.  Five of our current layouts operate on TT&TO, one on CTC, and one on TWC.  All require a full time dispatcher for each session.  Three of the five layouts also staff an operator position (two on one of the railroads) if personnel are available. 

We use a deck of cards to determine seniority.  The dispatcher gets the Ace.  Everybody else draws, and then bids on yard, local, or road jobs, and where applicable, the "operator" job. 

Everybody gets a shot at their most coveted jobs, nobody gets preference, and nobody gets judged on their performance.  We all screw up on occasion, and that does result in friendly banter about the person who violated the rules.  We all learn from it.  We continue to have fun the next session. 

I don't want to become the "safety compliance officer" during a session any more than I want to stand around and be a 'weed weasel", waiting for people to commit a rules infraction.

I agree with Caniac, what is described is a merit / demerit system.

Regards,

GNNPNUT

Call it what you like

Way over my head.

Man, this stuff is waaaaaaaayyy over my head.  I can see how far behind I am on the evolutionary scale of model railroading when I see topics like this.

It's like you've been exploring space for years and I haven't even gotten a rocket into orbit yet!  LOL

Seniority

An actual seniority system can be useful.  The majority of the ones I have seen are based on the number of sessions people have participated in, some provide double points for work sessions.  The higher the seniority, the earlier the pick you got for jobs.   That encourages participation.

Most layouts I am familiar with that had those types of systems eventually stopped using them because after a while the "regulars" accumulated so much seniority nobody else could hold a key job and the regulars always got to pick the cherry jobs.  Eventually they went to a few key regulars doing the mission critical jobs (dispatcher, crew caller, main yard yardmaster) or being mentors for breaking in new operators and everybody else getting to pick based on a random draw of numbers.

If you want to have a "seniority system", then it needs to be reset every year.  Maybe the top 1/3 start the new year with 3 points, the middle third with 2 points and the bottom third with one point, then they get a point for every session they participate.  The regulars rise to the top, but they can be overtaken and nobody is trapped at the bottom of the list forever.

The system that Joe proposed would be the kiss of death for a layout, besides being a record keeping nightmare.

Here in NJ.....

....Some owners keep an informal list of who were the original operators from the beginning of operations, and/or who helped pitch in to build the layout, thus they get "seniority" on picking jobs......I'm only 51, and there are those of the original crew along with me that have 10-15 years of age on me and have +30 years of knowing the owner over me, but somehow, I am #3 on the roster! Bottom line, we use it as a fun "bragging rights" kind of thing.  Personally, I like Joe's "system", but with how thin-skinned today's society is about stupid little things and the "culture of exclusion" in almost any group setting, I don't see this working out on a big scale, and in fact, being all but attacked as "bad".

Perhaps by using an "extra

Perhaps by using an "extra board" of sorts, but as a kind of wildcard, newer hands could get the opportunity to get time on more coveted positions.

For example, if someone on a bulletined local switch job is laying off, on vacation or out sick, someone from the extra board will be called to fill in. For a model railroad, this could be implemented as easily as drawing numbers out of a cap. Say no. 1 on the roster gets the low number, he/she then is deemed "out of service" for their favorite job only for the current ops session and someone with little or no seniority can fill in (presuming they are qualified). The no. 1 person could graciously take another job.

I'm all for brainstorming

Half-baked

Our operating group does not run a seniority system other than a self-policing one.

Jobs are assigned according to a random number draw. We all pull poker chips engraved with numbers from a bag and the low number holder gets first pick.  In general, any job is open to any member.  In practice, people are encouraged to not bite off more than they can chew. It's not fair to 19 members if their Saturday ops session is ruined by one person who hasn't learned a critical job.  Several positions require two people, so it is easy for someone to sign up with an experienced operator and learn how something works. We have gone to some effort to make all of the jobs on the railroad interesting in one way or another, and none are wrapped in a cloak of "exclusivity."

This loosey-goosey system has failed a couple of times, almost always when somebody thinks they know everything, but does not.  The recovery turns into a learning experience for all of us.

The positive result is that it has built up a corps of a half-dozen dispatchers and several highly competent yard operators, in addition to skilled train crews. Even in Covid times, with 1/3 the usual crew at any session, we can still have good ops no matter who shows up on a given day.

Another advantage is that, instead of following a tightly structured protocol, people can learn at their own rate. A few people have stepped into complicated jobs with little knowledge of our specific railroad, but with a strong background in railroading in general.  All they need is a few pointers about potential traps in the line-up, or in the physical layout, like "no, you can't have two standard length trains meet on the branch, unless you do it in the long siding at Silverton."

Another advantage is that the 25-30 people on our standard call board are pretty much in agreement on the concept and purpose of the railroad, and they tend not to argue that "the old XY&Z would never have done it that way."

Our takeaways:

Relaxed attitudes make for happy op sessions.

People who have been around the longest time do not necessarily know every detail about every job.

People who just walked in the door may have some knowledge that the rest of us do not.

Every person deserves the chance to learn, make mistakes, and add to their knowledge.

Qualification system

First off, we aren't talking about a "seniority system", we are talking about a "qualification" system.  One could follow the prototype and if you successfully work a job you are qualified and you remain qualified as long as you work the job every year or two.  If somebody HAD to do something formal, write a path to get to a position.  To be a this, you have to work these 4 jobs. 

The question I have is, with a system such as the article proposed, how would that work if a layout is just starting out?  If you have to work 5 other jobs or get 1000 points to be yardmaster, what does the railroad do for the 5 or 6 sessions it takes to build up the points or prerequisites?  On session #1, you still have to fill all the jobs, and you just pick somebody, and you do that successfully for the next 4 or 5 sessions, why do you need a qualification system?

If I was going to do anything even remotely like this, I would limit people to only working the same job more than 3 or 4 times per year. Then just check off the jobs as the people work them.  As they reach the max, they have to work the other positions.  That allows other people to have a shot and forces people to be cross trained.

Let’s ask this, what am I trying to accomplish?

Get stoned

Headstoned, that is.  One former local layout (owner moved to Florida about 10 years ago) featured a cemetery in one corner with headstones for every operator who'd been "killed" in a wreck.  If he had hit another train, there was a headstone for that operator too, and they both went to the bottom of the seniority list.  Life isn't fair that way.....

I think he was well into his second pack of Woodland Scenics headstones after about 15 years of operations.

Scott Chatfield

Door bell seniority

I used to use two types of seniority on my previous layout. One session was doorbell seniority. The first person there was #1 and then so forth. It encourages operators to be on time. 
 

The other method was drawing cards. Simple deck of playing cards with only one suit was used. Ace high, two low... pick your job. 

Completely different tack

Those are absolutely not at all the take-aways I got from that article.

I started writing an answer going through the whole list of bullet items but deleted it because it was bumming me out just writing about it.

Simplest answer.  Be more professional.  Be more prototypical.  Use the right verbiage.  Say "Over" and "out".  Have forms with the right format and the railroad name.  Make the ambiance more prototypical.  Don't make it the experience of working for a railroad, make it the activities of a railroad.  There is a difference.

Agree with Dave

If you really want the railroad experience....

Call your crews 2 hours on a holiday in the middle of dinner. Or in the middle of the night.

Then once they show up, tell them they have to wait 4 hours before the trains ready. Then sit in a siding for 2 hours..

Etc, etc 

Dave's comments about making it more "professional" is the most appealing. I've been in a round robin ops group that is about 50% real railroaders. We all use the same verbage like at work, with a few adult beverages thrown in for fun. We are 50% serious, 50% having fun "playing trains". 

Grin

If you ever tell a real railroader, "I want to operate like a prototype railroad!", and he or she gets a really big grin on their face, you might want to buckle up, it could be a bumpy ride.

What is wrong with playing

What is wrong with playing with trains

Nothing wrong with it...

however there is a group of us who want it more than that.  For some we are creating a 3D simulator (and no running a computer simulator doesn't cut it) and therefore want to emulate the prototype without including the more mundane/onerous issues related to the prototype.

Ken L. 

Great replies from Craig and

Great replies from Craig and from Dave H.!

As to goal #1, that's a tough one, because Class 1 railroad culture has pretty much kicked the stuffings out of what enjoyment remained in the job even compared to 20 years ago. Most everyone I work with is focused on going home not under investigation at the end of the day regardless of production or where their train is at the end of 12 hours service. Morale? Yeah, I seem to recall we had that once. Now, the more you do, the more risk to which you expose yourself to getting pulled out of service. And now drug-crazed/mentally ill vagrants are breaking into locomotives and signal bungalows while the politically discontent are committing acts of sabotage that endanger us.

I don't think that's what you're looking for.

#2 -- A demerit system which in a fun way penalizes them for "rules" violations, but still gets the message across. A demerit wouldn't necessarily affect seniority, but would just be a temporary setback in choice of jobs.

As to goal #4, railroading is dangerous even when you are paying attention.

Dave H. said: " Don't make it the experience of working for a railroad, make it the activities of a railroad.  There is a difference."

Bingo!