-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Multiple employees on the same trip #54
Comments
Agree with the proposal, also with the idea to add the role/job of the employee in Questions that I had:
|
|
I would highly recommend we make One key thing that I want to clarify is that there is a need in the rail world to distinguish between the type of work ("activity" or "piece" type… in Hastus parlance, at least) being undertaken, and the type of the job itself. Commuter Trains in North America typically operate with a Locomotive Engineer, a Conductor, and 0+ other employees typically dubbed Assistant Conductors, Collectors, Trainmen, Brakemen, etc. Boston Example of Different Job TypesIn Boston, each trip operates with an Engineer (performing Engineer work), a Conductor (performing Conductor work), and a "matched" Assistant Conductor (performing Assistant Conductor work). All three employees will have separate run numbers (e.g. Engineer = 201, Conductor = 401, AC = 601), but work identical trips on pieces of work aligning with their activity (e.g. trains 102-205-206-311-312-117). Many rush hour trips will also have additional "unmatched" or "extra" Assistant Conductors who will work alongside the matched crew on certain trips, but not the matched crew's entire job (e.g. the above may be a straight job, but an unmatched AC may work 102-205-206 with the prior crew, go on a release/split, and then return to work 423-424-125). (This is, of course, in addition to the concept that all four employees could be a "recrew" / en-route relief of another set of employees at the start/end of their assignments, or before/after a relief.) Elsewhere in the Northeast
PromotionsAs if the above isn't crazy enough, there's then the concept of "promotions," generally the case when an Assistant Conductor who's qualified to work as a Conductor works part of their day as an AC and part of their day as a Conductor. This could be:
And just to wrap things up for good measure, down at Virginia Railway Express on our counterpart Keolis Commuter Rail operation in North America, we have crews who work "ACE" jobs, where they could literally be working as an Assistant Conductor, a Conductor, or an Engineer. Implicationtl;dr We need a way to say, "this is a ____ run," and then need to say within the run, "you're working the trip in ____ capacity," but we do not need to assign multiple employees to the same run identifier. …and rail is complex. (This also relates to my "other" comment in #51 (comment) about specifying an |
I've just opened #60 , which has Jeff, if that meets your needs, then we could close this issue. |
@skyqrose Okay to close per my comments in #60 (comment) Thanks! |
On the MBTA Green Line, most trips require two operators, one for each car of the two-car train. It matters who's assigned to the lead car (driving the train) and who's in the 2nd car (just fares+doors). Each operator has their own run number.
Other agencies could run into this with operators+conductors, or any other situation where a trip requires multiple employees.
How would this be represented?
Some thoughts:
run_id
column intrips.txt
ordeadheads.txt
that would get in the way.runs.txt
have the same trip, but we should probably mention that explicitly in the docs, cuz it'd be easy to incorrectly assume.runs.txt
that describes the job/responsibility for the trip/event would satisfy that, and address Scott's comment here.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: