2015 Modal Profile Report

Modal Profile Report.pdf

Workforce Development (WFD) Survey

2015 Modal Profile Report

OMB: 2130-0621

⚠️ Notice: This form may be outdated. More recent filings and information on OMB 2130-0621 can be found here:

Document [pdf]

Download: pdf | pdf

U.S. Department of
Transportation
Federal Railroad
Administration

Railroad Industry Modal Profile: An Outline of
the Railroad Industry Workforce Trends,
Challenges, and Opportunities - Update

Office of Research
and Development
Washington, DC 20590

DOT/FRA/ORD-XX/XX

Draft Final Report
June 2015

NOTICE
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the
Department of Transportation in the interest of information
exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for
its contents or use thereof.
Any opinions, findings and
conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material do not
necessarily reflect the views or policies of the United States
Government, nor does mention of trade names, commercial
products, or organizations imply endorsement by the United States
Government. The United States Government assumes no liability
for the content or use of the material contained in this document.

NOTICE
The United States Government does not endorse products or
manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein
solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this
report.

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

Form Approved
OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson
Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.
1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank)

2. REPORT DATE

3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

June 2015

Technical Report

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Railroad Industry Modal Profile: An Outline of the Railroad Industry Workforce Trends,
Challenges, and Opportunities - Update

5. FUNDING NUMBERS

6. AUTHOR(S)

Ms. Monique Stewart (Federal Railroad Administration)
Mr. Lloyd Parker (T. White Parker Associates, Incorporated)
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
REPORT NUMBER

T. White Parker Associates, Incorporated
22636 Davis Drive, #345
Sterling, VA 20164

N/A

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

10. SPONSORING/MONITORING
AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Railroad Administration
Office of Railroad Policy and Development
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20590

DOT/FRA/ORD-XX/XX

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

COR: Ms. Monique Stewart

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

This document is available to the public through the FRA Web site at http://www.fra.dot.gov.

12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

In 2011, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Office of Research and Development (R&D) published the first edition of the
“Railroad Industry Modal Profile: An Outline of the Railroad Industry Workforce Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities” in
response to the DOT National Transportation Workforce Initiative. The profile provided a comprehensive assessment of the
railroad workforce and identified six key workforce challenges facing the industry at that time. Since the initial publication, the
profile has been widely used as a source of information and insight regarding railroad industry workforce development. Thus, the
FRA Office of R&D determined that it should be updated periodically to reflect the latest industry trends, issues, and best
practices. Recently, the FRA Office of R&D conducted another analysis to gauge the current and future state of the industry’s
workforce based on available quantitative employment data and industry stakeholder dialogs, which led to the identification of the
following key workforce challenges. Although it is not the FRA’s intent to solve these challenges, the FRA continues to foster
industry collaboration to increase the visibility of key issues and innovative workforce development initiatives.
14. SUBJECT TERMS

15. NUMBER OF PAGES

Aging Workforce, Diversity, Federal Railroad Administration, PreK-12, Railroad Industry
Workforce, Recruiting, Retention, STEM, Training and Development, Work-Life Balance
17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
OF REPORT

18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
OF THIS PAGE

19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
OF ABSTRACT

Unclassified

43
16. PRICE CODE
20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

METRIC/ENGLISH CONVERSION FACTORS
ENGLISH TO METRIC
LENGTH

METRIC TO ENGLISH
LENGTH (APPROXIMATE)

(APPROXIMATE)

1 inch (in)

2.5 centimeters (cm)

1 millimeter (mm) = 0.04 inch (in)

1 foot (ft)

30 centimeters (cm)

1 centimeter (cm) = 0.4 inch (in)

1 yard (yd)

0.9 meter (m)

1 mile (mi)

1.6 kilometers (km)

1 meter (m) = 3.3 feet (ft)
1 meter (m) = 1.1 yards (yd)
1 kilometer (km) = 0.6 mile (mi)

AREA (APPROXIMATE)

1 square inch (sq in, in2)

6.5 square centimeters (cm2)

1 square foot (sq ft, ft2)

0.09 square meter (m2)

1 square yard (sq yd, yd )

0.8 square meter (m )

1 square mile (sq mi, mi )

2.6 square kilometers (km )

1 acre = 0.4 hectare (he)

4,000 square meters (m2)

1 square centimeter (cm2) = 0.16 square inch (sq in, in2)
1 square meter (m2) = 1.2 square yards (sq yd, yd2)
1 square kilometer (km2) = 0.4 square mile (sq mi, mi2)

10,000 square meters (m2) = 1 hectare (ha) = 2.5 acres

MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE)
1 ounce (oz)

28 grams (gm)

1 pound (lb)

0.45 kilogram (kg)

1 short ton = 2,000 pounds
(lb)

0.9 tonne (t)

MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE)
1 gram (gm) = 0.036 ounce (oz)
1 kilogram (kg) = 2.2 pounds (lb)
1 tonne (t) = 1,000 kilograms (kg)
= 1.1 short tons

VOLUME (APPROXIMATE)

1 teaspoon (tsp)

5 milliliters (ml)

1 milliliter (ml) = 0.03 fluid ounce (fl oz)

1 tablespoon (tbsp)

15 milliliters (ml)

1 liter (l) = 2.1 pints (pt)

1 fluid ounce (fl oz)

30 milliliters (ml)

1 liter (l) = 1.06 quarts (qt)

1 cup (c)

0.24 liter (l)

1 liter (l) = 0.26 gallon (gal)

1 pint (pt)

0.47 liter (l)

1 quart (qt)

0.96 liter (l)

1 gallon (gal)

3.8 liters (l)

1 cubic foot (cu ft, ft3)

0.03 cubic meter (m3)

1 cubic meter (m3) = 36 cubic feet (cu ft, ft3)

1 cubic yard (cu yd, yd3)

0.76 cubic meter (m3)

1 cubic meter (m3) = 1.3 cubic yards (cu yd, yd3)

TEMPERATURE (EXACT)

[(x-32)(5/9)] °F = y °C

[(9/5) y + 32] °C = x °F

QUICK INCH - CENTIMETER LENGTH CONVERSION
1

Inches
Centimeters 0

QUICK FAHRENHEIT - CELSIUS TEMPERATURE CONVERSION
°F -40° -22°

-4°

14°

32°

50°

68°

86°

104°

122°

°C -40° -30°

-20°

-10°

0°

10°

20°

30°

40°

50°

140° 158° 176° 194° 212°
60°

70°

80°

90° 100°

For more exact and or other conversion factors, see NIST Miscellaneous Publication 286, Units of Weights and
Updated 6/17/98
Measures. Price $2.50 SD Catalog No. C13 10286

Acknowledgements
The Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) Office of Research and Development (R&D)
would like to thank the following railroad industry stakeholders for sharing their perspectives in
support of this study. These stakeholders include representatives from academia, associations,
Class I freight and passenger railroads, labor unions, and state Departments of Transportation,
along with other organizations who contribute to the railroad industry.
Associations
American Public Transportation Association (APTA)
Association of American Railroads (AAR)
Academia
Michigan Technological University
National Academy of Railroad Sciences (NARS)
San José State University
Texas A&M Transportation Institute
University of Tennessee - Knoxville
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Class I Railroads
Amtrak
CSX
Norfolk Southern Corporation
Union Pacific
General
Operation Lifesaver, Incorporated (OLI)
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Labor Unions
Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen (BRS)
United Transportation Union (UTU)

iii

Contents
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ iii
Contents…………………………………………………………………………………………...i
v
Illustrations………………………………………………………………………………………vi
Tables……………………………………………………………………………………………vii
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.
1.1
1.2
1.3

Introduction ................................................................................................................. 4
Background ................................................................................................................. 4
Document Scope.......................................................................................................... 8
Approach ..................................................................................................................... 9

2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7

Railroad Industry Workforce Composition ............................................................... 11
Class I Freight Railroads ........................................................................................... 11
Class I Passenger Railroad: Amtrak .......................................................................... 12
Regionals and Short Line Railroads .......................................................................... 12
Labor Unions ............................................................................................................. 12
Rolling Stock Manufacturers and Suppliers .............................................................. 13
Associations............................................................................................................... 13
Academia ................................................................................................................... 13

Analysis Findings ...................................................................................................... 16
3.1
Issues Update from Prior Report - 2011 .................................................................... 16
3.1.1 Aging Workforce ....................................................................................................... 17
3.1.2 Workforce Diversity .................................................................................................. 17
3.1.3 Overall Image of the Industry ................................................................................... 17
3.1.4 National Training Standards for Freight Rail Trade and Craft Positions .................. 17
3.1.5 Work-Life Balance .................................................................................................... 18
3.1.6 Quality of Data and Metrics ...................................................................................... 18
3.2
Current Railroad Industry Workforce Issues – 2014................................................. 18
3.2.1 Work-Life Balance .................................................................................................... 19
3.2.2 Aging Workforce ....................................................................................................... 20
3.2.3 Workforce Diversity .................................................................................................. 20
3.2.4 Recruiting .................................................................................................................. 21
3.2.5 Generational Matriculation........................................................................................ 22
3.3
Industry Workforce Development Initiatives ............................................................ 22
3.3.1 Training and Development ........................................................................................ 22

3.3.2 PreK-12 and Collegiate Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics
Outreach .................................................................................................................... 23
4.

Railroad Workforce Outlook ..................................................................................... 24
4.1
Future State of Rail.................................................................................................... 24
4.1.1 Efficiency and Technology ....................................................................................... 24
4.1.2 Competing for Talent ................................................................................................ 24
4.2
4.3
4.4

High-Speed Rail ........................................................................................................ 24
Positive Train Control (PTC) .................................................................................... 25
Railroad Workforce Outlook ..................................................................................... 25
Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 26

Appendix A. “An Examination of Employee Recruitment and Retention in the U.S. Railroad
Industry” Study Findings .............................................................................................................. 27
Abbreviations and Acronyms ....................................................................................................... 29
References………………………………………………………………………………………..31

Illustrations
Figure 1: Railroad Industry Age Distribution in 2008, 2010 and 2012 .......................................... 1
Figure 2: FRA-WDT Focus, Scope, and Accomplishments ........................................................... 5
Figure 3: FRA-WDT Roadmap for Improving 2011 Workforce Challenges ................................. 7
Figure 5: Class I Freight and Passenger Labor Distributions ....................................................... 11
Figure 6: Railroad Work-life Balance Sentiment by Stakeholder Category................................. 19
Figure 7: Railroad Workforce Aging Sentiments by Stakeholder Category ................................ 20
Figure 8: Railroad Workforce Diversity Sentiments by Stakeholder Category ........................... 21
Figure 9: Railroad Recruiting Sentiments among Stakeholders by Category .............................. 21
Figure 10: Railroad Sentiments Regarding Generational Matriculation by Category.................. 22
Figure 11: Five-Year Railroad Workforce Population Projection ................................................ 25

Tables
Table 1: 2014 Railroad Industry Workforce Challenges ................................................................ 3
Table 2: FRA-WDT Program Activities Summary ........................................................................ 5
Table 3: Top Railroad Industry Challenges – 2011 Report ............................................................ 6
Table 4: FRA Workforce Development Program Element Mapping to 2011 Railroad Industry
Challenges ....................................................................................................................................... 7
Table 5: 2011 Railroad Industry Modal Profile References in Industry ......................................... 8
Table 6: Identified Workforce Challenges from 2011 Modal Profile........................................... 16
Table 7: 2014 Railroad Industry Workforce Challenges .............................................................. 19

vii

Executive Summary
In 2011, the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)
published the first Railroad Industry Modal Profile: An Outline of the Railroad Industry
Workforce Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities, which provided a comprehensive overview of
the railroad industry workforce as of December 31, 2008. The Railroad Industry Modal Profile
was a response to the DOT National Transportation Workforce Development Initiative that
required each DOT Operating Administration (OA), also referred to as modes, to produce an
analysis of its industry workforce.
The prevailing workforce concerns during the early stages of the DOT National Transportation
Workforce Development Initiative were the large number of retirement-eligible employees in
transportation related fields and the national shortages in science, technology, engineering, and
math (STEM) graduates. Since the railroad industry had done very little hiring in the late 1980s
and throughout most of the 1990s, the retirement-eligible population became quite large, which
exacerbated the concern regarding retirement eligibility, even beyond that of most other
industries and transportation modes (each of which were also grappling with similar retirement
population concerns).

Number of Employees

Railroad Employee Age Distribution
50,000
45,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0

2008
2010
2012

Age Range
Figure 1: Railroad Industry Age Distribution in 2008, 2010 and 2012

Feedback from Class I railroad dialogs suggests that the rate of retirement has been fairly
constant over the past several years and is not on the rise. Today, retirements are about half of all
attrition for the industry that typically maintains just under ten percent. Figure 1 1 shown above,
illustrates the age distribution of the rail workforce in 2008, 2010 and 2012. More specifically,
the figure confirms that the rail industry employs a significant number of employees 40 years of
age and older. In addition, the number of employees 60 years of age and older has steadily
increased since 2008 suggesting that those reaching retirement eligibility status chose to remain
1

in the workforce longer than intended. This fact contradicts the sense of urgency regarding
retirement eligibility and introduces another workforce dynamic: the rate at which people exit the
workforce is fairly random and not something that can be easily predicted. This dynamic seems
quite plausible since the factors that one considers when contemplating retirement are very
personal and involves finances, family, and a host of other factors that likely differ widely from
employee to employee.
While several factors have contributed to the slower-than-expected exit of those employees
eligible for retirement, it is impossible to isolate any particular causal factor. However, world
events offer some insight; during the period of the prior modal profile, the United States (U.S.)
was fighting foreign wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the world was still in economic recovery
from the Global Recession (also known as the Financial Crisis of 2008). These major national
priorities drew employees out of the domestic labor force into military service, and may have led
some workers to stay in the labor force longer than they otherwise might have. Also, many
workers may have lacked the financial foundation for their retirement due to diminished savings
and overall poor economic conditions. Lastly, railroad companies recognized the age
distribution concern and began aggressive human capital programs aimed at knowledge
management, recruiting, training, and retention.
This report serves as an update to the 2011 Railroad Industry Modal Profile publication and uses
the latest available employment data possible, and suggests that the state of the rail workforce
has steadily improved since the last Railroad Industry Modal Profile publication. This is
consistent with both the rail workforce analysis and stakeholder dialogues. Following the same
methodology used in the 2011 study, the FRA Office of R&D discussed this subject with
industry stakeholders from the following segments.
• Academia
• Associations
• Class I Railroads
• Labor Unions
• Regional and Short Line Railroads
• State Departments of Transportation
After the discussions, responses for each industry segment were aggregated and areas of
consensus were identified for each workforce development focus area. The collected responses
were also used to determine sentiments and perspectives by segment. Where possible, segment
aggregated responses were compared across stakeholder segments to identify commonalities and
differences. Finally, the most common challenges were identified and considered the key
workforce challenges currently facing the railroad industry. Those challenges were then
compared to the challenges highlighted in the initial Railroad Industry Modal Profile to
determine if industry sentiments had changed and if progress had been made.
Based on the discussions with stakeholders that were conducted as part of this study, many of the
issues facing the railroad industry (see Table 1), are similar to those that were discussed
previously; however, the overall impact of each issue is reduced in significance since the 2011
study.

Table 1: 2014 Railroad Industry Workforce Challenges

#
1
2
3
4
5

2014 Workforce Challenge
Work-Life Balance
Aging Workforce
Recruiting (New)
Diversity
Generational Matriculation (New)

Issue in 2011
■
■
■

1. Introduction
In 2011, the Department of Transportation (DOT), Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)
published the first edition of the Railroad Industry Modal Profile: An Outline of the Railroad
Industry Workforce Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities in response to a DOT National
Transportation Workforce Development Strategy Initiative. This department-wide initiative
partnered staff from each DOT Operating Administration (OA), also referred to as modes, to
discuss issues and trends across the entire transportation sector. Each OA produced a modal
profile, which broadly addressed the composition and challenges of its respective industry
workforce. The modal profile was used by DOT to establish a national, cross-modal workforce
strategy framework.
When FRA published the Railroad Industry Modal Profile in tandem with numerous supporting
activities led by the Administration (e.g. stakeholder dialogs, conference briefings, conference
publications, research projects, and responses to external railroad industry workforce data
requests), it spurred a wide-scale interest in railroad workforce development throughout the
industry. As a result, FRA continues to support its workforce development strategy and policy
through outreach, industry stakeholder engagement, workforce analysis, and reporting.
1.1

Background

In 2007, FRA’s Office of Policy and Program Development conducted a study entitled An
Examination of Employee Recruitment and Retention in the U.S. Railroad Industry which
identified the recruitment and retention challenges that the U.S. freight railroad industry faced,
given the increase in the retirement-eligible population and growth in freight railroad
transportation. After conducting structured interviews and focus groups with several industry
stakeholders, it was determined that the lack of work-life balance was a primary challenge to
recruitment efforts, due to demanding work schedules, the incremental pay rate system for
particular craft positions, and the lack of an available pipeline to train and develop qualified
talent. The study also determined that relocation, furloughs, misperceptions of job functions, and
demanding work schedules made it difficult for the industry to retain talent. Additional findings
from this study can be found in Appendix A.
In early 2009, the FRA was requested to support the DOT National Transportation Workforce
Development Strategy Initiative, led by DOT’s Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST).
This initiative’s goal was to develop an Analytical Foundation which outlines the need for a
national cross-modal approach to addressing transportation workforce development challenges.
Each DOT OA was asked to support the development of the Analytical Foundation by
developing a modal profile for its respective industry; this profile identified the current state of
the industry from a workforce perspective and it included challenges as well as potential
solutions. In response to OST’s request, Ms. Monique Stewart was designated as the FRA
Workforce Development Lead and the FRA-Workforce Development Team (WDT) was formed
(see Figure 2), which consisted of representatives from the FRA Office of Research and
Development, FRA Office of Railroad Safety, railroad academia, and a Subject Matter Expert
(SME) in Human Capital Planning.

Figure 2: FRA-WDT Focus, Scope, and Accomplishments

The FRA-WDT focuses on external (non-FRA) industry perspectives and convenes regularly to
discuss FRA industry related workforce development data calls and actions. Additionally,
several projects have been initiated to expand the outreach function of the FRA-WDT, some of
which are highlighted in Table 2. The FRA-WDT is continuously considering innovative
projects that may improve the industry’s awareness of workforce issues, heighten the level of
perception regarding the nuances of the rail industry workforce, or otherwise contribute to
promoting the interest of the broader rail industry across the active labor force.
Table 2: FRA-WDT Program Activities Summary

Project Name
Web-based PreK – 12 Outreach Portal

High Speed Rail Learning System (HSRLS)
Railway Engineering Education Symposium
(REES) Scholarship

Project Description
A prototype STEM-based outreach portal for elementary
school-aged students and their teachers to learn about railroad
technology, occupations, and community importance.
A prototype online learning system to deliver high-speed rail
and other rail related courses to the public in an effort to
develop the skills needed to support and sustain the U.S. highspeed rail system.
A collegiate sponsorship for faculty to participate in the annual
REES where railroad engineering education is highlighted.

With the FRA-WDT established, efforts to develop the Railroad Industry Modal Profile
commenced in 2010. Expanding upon the recruitment and retention study conducted by the FRA
three years prior, the FRA-WDT conducted focused discussions with several industry
5

stakeholders representing academia, associations, Class I freight railroads, labor unions, and state
Departments of Transportation, among others to fully understand the railroad industry
workforce. Each industry stakeholder participated in an informal dialog about the current state of
the railroad industry and the railroad industry workforce, as well as their thoughts on the future
of the railroad workforce. The information from the collected dialogs is presented in Table 3.
Once the key challenges had been identified, the FRA-WDT defined the workforce development
program’s areas of focus (depicted in Figure 3), which serves as the action framework for which
industry workforce development efforts can be aligned. Elements can be added or removed from
the conceptual action framework, as the nature of the railroad industry continues to evolve.
Table 3: Top Railroad Industry Challenges – 2011 Report

#
1
2
3
4

Workforce
Challenge
Aging Workforce –
Knowledge Transfer
Workforce Diversity
(Women, Minorities,
Other)
Overall Image of the
Industry
National Training
Standards for Freight
Rail Trade and Craft
Positions
Work-Life Balance
(Attrition in the 0-5
Year Population of
Rail Employees)
Quality of Data and
Metrics Available to
Monitor Rail Industry
Workforce Trends

Academia
■

■

Associations

Class I
Railroads

FRA

Labor
Unions

Short Lines
& Regionals

■

■
■

■

Pipeline Development Programs - Programs geared toward reshaping the public image of the
railroad industry and emphasizing the multitude of railroad career options available.
Qualitative Enhancements - Initiatives to help improve the information and data available from
which to gauge and monitor the health of the railroad industry workforce.
Figure 3: FRA-WDT Roadmap for Improving 2011 Workforce Challenges

Each workforce challenge was then aligned with one or more of the FRA-WDT program focus
areas. This mapping allowed the team to maintain focus on each challenge while workforce
activities and projects were being executed. Table 4 shows how the program elements were
aligned to the key challenges.
Table 4: FRA Workforce Development Program Element
Mapping to 2011 Railroad Industry Challenges

Workforce
Challenge

Aging Workforce – Knowledge
Transfer
Workforce Diversity (Women,
2
Minorities, Other)
1

3 Overall Image of the Industry
National Training Standards for
4 Freight Rail Trade and Craft
Positions
Work-Life Balance (Attrition in
5 the 0-5 Year Population of Rail
Employees)

FRA Workforce Development Program Element
Pipeline Programs: PreK-12; Collegiate; Trade &
Craft
Pipeline Programs: PreK-12; Collegiate; Trade &
Craft
Pipeline Programs: PreK-12; Collegiate; Trade &
Craft
Qualitative Enhancements: Current Workforce
Development
Pipeline Programs: PreK-12; Collegiate; Trade &
Craft

Quality of Data and Metrics
6 Available to Monitor Rail
Industry Workforce Trends

Qualitative Enhancements: Data & Metrics

The FRA–WDT did not attempt to directly solve railroad workforce challenges; instead, the
group encouraged industry-wide collaboration that: 1) fosters broader industry dialog and 2)
brings cohesion to the efforts of individual organizations expended on workforce development.
The 2011 publication of the Railroad Industry Modal Profile was well received by the railroad
community and the general public. In fact, the document was cited by the industry workforce
related publications and initiatives shown in Table 5.

Table 5: 2011 Railroad Industry Modal Profile References in Industry

Date

1.2

Event/Organization

Publication/Initiative

March 2011

American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME) Joint Rail
Conference (JRC)

April 2011

1st World Congress on Rail
Training

April 2012

National Transportation Workforce
Summit

2013

Transportation Research Board
(TRB)

2013

U. S. Department of Labor
Employment and Training
Administration

“Railroad Industry Workforce Assessment –
Next Steps: Working Together To Shape the
Rail Workforce of the 21st Century”
publication
“Railroad Industry Workforce Assessment –
Next Steps: Working Together To Shape The
Rail Workforce Of The 21st Century”
publication
“Railroad Industry Workforce Assessment –
Next Steps: Working Together To Shape The
Rail Workforce Of The 21st Century”
publication
National Cooperative Rail Research Program
(NCRRP) Project 06-01: Building and
Retaining Workforce Capacity for the Railroad
Industry
Transportation, Distribution, and Logistics
Competency Model

Scope

This report updates the 2011 Railroad Industry Modal Profile study (which analyzed railroad
industry data as of December 31, 2008) by providing a look at the state of the railroad industry
workforce as of December 31, 2012. For the purposes of this study, updated data for the railroad
industry workforce was collected, new stakeholder dialogs were facilitated, analyses were
conducted, and new results identified. The findings from the 2011 Railroad Industry Modal
Profile were revisited to determine the degree to which those issues have changed since the last
publication.

While some aspects of the document have been enhanced or expanded (e.g., additional
stakeholder discussion), the focus remains on highlighting the railroad industry workforce and
the challenges it faces. No attempts are made to correct or otherwise solve any of the industry
issues presented herein. However, monitoring the state of the workforce and keeping salient
issues at the forefront within DOT and the broader industry adds value to the industry and its
stakeholders. Periodic updates to the document ensure adequate consideration of factors that may
impact the state of the railroad industry workforce.
1.3

Approach

This study follows the approach introduced in the 2011 Railroad Industry Modal Profile with the
intent to: 1) research and collect available workforce data pertaining to the railroad industry (e.g.,
quantitative data as of December 31, 2012); 2) validate quantitative data with information
obtained through industry stakeholder discussions; 3) identify indicators from across the industry
that might impact the workforce (e.g., high-speed rail progress, Positive Train Control (PTC));
and 4) use the aggregation of all information obtained to forecast the future status of the railroad
industry workforce.
The FRA-WDT recognizes that there are a number of entities and stakeholders that comprise the
railroad industry. These entities range from manufacturing firms to the railroad companies
themselves. For the purposes of this study, the railroad industry workforce is defined as:
•
•
•
•
•
•

Class I freight railroads
Class I passenger railroad (Amtrak)
Federal Railroad Administration
Regional railroads
Rolling stock manufacturers and suppliers
Short line railroads

Quantitative Data
To obtain quantitative employment data for each industry segment, the FRA-WDT relied heavily
on data provided by the Surface Transportation Board (STB), which collects quarterly
employment data for each Class I freight railroad and Amtrak. In addition, the group used the
most current data provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Railroad Retirement Board
(RRB), Association of American Railroads (AAR), and the FRA Office of Human Resources.
Given the publication cycles of the employment data maintained by BLS, RRB, and AAR, the
FRA-WDT determined that it would use employment data as of December 31, 2012. The use of
2012 data ensured that an equal comparison of employment data for each industry segment was
conducted.
Qualitative Data – Railroad Industry Stakeholder Dialogs
For the collection of qualitative data on the current state of the railroad industry and its
workforce, the FRA-WDT facilitated dialogs with representatives from the industry segments
(mentioned above). In order to guide the dialogs, the FRA-WDT developed discussion
frameworks for each segment to address topics such as industry and workforce outlooks,
workforce challenges, recruiting, retention, training, and diversity. While the discussion
9

frameworks were created to guide each dialog through similar topics, participants could provide
any pertinent information deemed appropriate to the topic area.
Next, the FRA-WDT selected a wide range of industry representatives, including participants
from academia, various associations, Class I freight railroads, Amtrak, labor unions, and state
DOTs. Representatives ranged from technical staff to Human Resources professionals with
knowledge of workforce strategies, plans, and activities. Several of the participants were also
contributors to the prior study, allowing for continuity in the dialogs.
Once the dialogs were conducted, responses for each industry segment were aggregated and
areas of consensus were identified for each workforce development focus area. The collected
responses were also used to determine sentiments and perspectives by segment. Where possible,
segment aggregated responses were compared across stakeholder segments to identify
commonalities and differences.
Finally, the FRA-WDT determined the most common workforce development challenges
identified by the stakeholders. Those challenges were then compared to the challenges
highlighted in the initial Railroad Industry Modal Profile to determine if industry sentiments had
changed and if progress had been made.

2. Railroad Industry Workforce Composition
The railroad industry employs an estimated 224,193 employees across the country. This total includes
Class I freight railroads, Amtrak, labor unions, short line and regional railroads, and rolling stock
manufacturers as well as suppliers.
2.1

Class I Freight Railroads

Class I freight railroads are defined as carriers with annual operating revenues of $452.7 million or
more. 2 According to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 49 Part 1245, Class I freight and
passenger railroad workforce groups are divided into six major occupational categories, including:
1. Executives, Officials, and Staff Assistants
2. Professional and Administrative
3. Maintenance of Way and Structures
4. Maintenance of Equipment and Stores
5. Transportation, Other Than Train and Engine
6. Transportation, Train and Engine
Title 49 CFR §1245 also provides sub-occupational categories for railroad employees, category
descriptions, and typical position titles. In alignment with 49 CFR §1245, STB requires that all Class I
freight and passenger railroads report their employment populations for each occupational category on a
quarterly basis. According to STB, the total employment population for Class I railroads, including
Amtrak, is 184,363 with Class I railroads representing 82 percent of the total railroad workforce. As
shown in Figure 5, the transportation (train and engine) occupational category accounts for a large
fraction of the total Class I railroad workforce and is typically comprised of trade and craft positions,
which have significant union representation. 3

Figure 4: Class I Freight and Passenger Labor Distributions

2.2

Class I Passenger Railroad: Amtrak

In 1970, Congress created Amtrak to take over the passenger rail services that had been operated by U.S.
private freight railroads. When Amtrak began service on 1971, more than half of the rail passenger
routes operated by the freight railroad companies were eliminated.
Today, Amtrak serves over 500 locations across the nation and transports an average of 86,000
passengers daily using over 300 Amtrak trains operated by 20,899 4 employees. 5 Amtrak also provides a
significant amount of the nation’s commuter rail services via the following organizations:
•
•
•
2.3

MARC (Maryland Area Regional Commuter)
Metrolink (California)
Shore Line East (Connecticut) 6
Regionals and Short Line Railroads

There are 450 railroads (see full listing) that do not meet the Class I operating revenue threshold and are
therefore considered Regional and Short Line railroads (which employ 17,800 7 workers). Regional
railroads, also referred to as Class IIs, are carriers with annual operating revenues of $36.2 million or
more and less than Class I minimum. 8 Short Line railroads, also referred to as Class IIIs, are carriers
with annual operating revenues of less than $36.2 million.9
2.4

Labor Unions

Of the 84 percent of the employees performing trade and craft job functions, nearly all of them are
represented by a labor union. Unions within the rail industry span various trade and craft segments, and
have an extensive history of ensuring that railroad employment rights are protected, which includes
advocating for safer work environments, appropriate compensation, reasonable hours of service, and
equality for union members.
The largest unions representing the railroad workforce are:
International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT)
•
•
•
•
•

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) Local Divisions
Brotherhood of Maintenance-of-Way Employees Division (BMWED) Local Lodges
Graphics Communications Conference (GCC) Locals
Teamsters Locals (Canada)
Teamsters Locals (United States) 10

Transportation Communications International Union (TCIU)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

American Railway and Airway Supervisors Association (ARASA)
Brotherhood of Railway Carmen of America
Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters
Order of Railroad Telegraphers
Railway Patrolmen's International Union
United Transport Services Employees Union
Western Railway Supervisors Association 11
12

Transportation Trades Department (TTD)
•
•
•
•
2.5

American Train Dispatchers Association (ATDA)
Brotherhood of Railway Signalmen (BRS)
Transportation Workers Union of America (TWU)
United Transportation Union (UTU) 12
Rolling Stock Manufacturers and Suppliers

The total number of manufacturers and suppliers is difficult to determine accurately. The BLS reports
that there are roughly 22,030 13 employees in railroad rolling stock manufacturing and supply, but this
number does not include all employees in this area of the industry. For example, those working for
conglomerate contractors, such as Lockheed Martin, General Electric, or Siemens are not accounted for
by BLS.
The manufacturers and suppliers in the railroad industry support both the trains and the track. On the
train side, manufacturers create individual train cars, locomotives, and all of the mechanical components
and devices that enable trains to function (e.g., brakes, couplers, carriages, wheels, bearings, etc.). Items
such as rails, ties, and ballast are included on the track side, as well as other wayside components, such
as signals, switches, and sensors.
2.6

Associations

There are many groups that represent one or more segments of the railroad industry. These entities
regularly interact with their constituents and have significant policy and directional influence within the
industry. The primary rail associations are listed below.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2.7

American Association of Railroad Superintendents (AARS)
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)
American Public Transportation Association (APTA)
American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA)
American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA)
Association of American Railroads (AAR)
National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP)
North American Rail Shippers Association (NARS)
United States High Speed Rail (USHSR) Association
Academia

Despite the steady growth of the railroad industry and the need for a sufficient talent pipeline at all
industry levels, a minimal number of U.S. collegiate institutions are focused on cultivating prospective
rail talent; however, interest has increased over the past few years. Often, candidates with engineering
backgrounds to include civil, mechanical, industrial, environmental, etc. are sought and once hired, are
offered rail specific training by their organization. A few U.S. four-year collegiate institutions with
railway education programs, research programs, and course offerings are provided below.
13

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Colorado State University - Pueblo
Michigan State University
Michigan Technological University
North Dakota State University
University of Illinois at Chicago
University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign
University of Kansas
University of Kentucky
University of Maryland-College Park
University of Memphis
University of North Florida
University of Wisconsin-Madison
South Dakota State University
Vanderbilt University
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

In addition to efforts made by U.S. academic institutions to promote rail education, the U.S. DOT and
the Council of University Transportation Centers (CUTC) established a National University Rail
(NURail) Center, which is a rail-focused, Tier-1 University Transportation Center (UTC). NURail is a
consortium comprised of seven U.S. universities and led by the Rail Transportation and Engineering
Center (RailTEC) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). NURail partners include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Michigan Technical University
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
University of Kentucky
University of Illinois at Chicago
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
University of Tennessee Knoxville14

The NURail Center’s primary objective is to improve and expand education, research, workforce
development, and technology transfer in the U.S. railroad industry by developing and implementing
diverse rail-oriented curricula. The Center is hosted at the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering at UIUC and it focuses on three primary research areas: 1) railroad infrastructure, 2) railroad
vehicles, and 3) railroad systems with an overall theme of shared rail corridors. 15
Not only is rail education offered by four-year U.S. academic institutions, but it is also available in U.S.
community and technical colleges. Community and technical colleges promote the development of skills
needed for trade and craft positions that represent a significant percentage of the railroad industry’s
workforce. The following U.S. community and technical colleges offer an array of rail related degrees,
certifications and training programs:
•
•

Dakota County Technical College (Minnesota) – Railroad Conductor Technology Certificate 16
Gateway Community College (Connecticut) – Associate in Applied Science: Railroad
Engineering 17
14

•
•
•

Johnson County Community College (Kansas) – Railroad Degrees and Fast Track Certificates 18
Metropolitan Community College (Missouri) – Associate in Applied Science: Railroad
Conductor (Affiliated with Johnson County Community College) 19
Tarrant County College (Texas) – Railroad Dispatcher Training Program 20

At a global level, U.S. and international academic institutions are collaborating on the development of
the UIC Railway Academy, a recognized MBA program that will be a partnership between EM LYON
Business School in France, Michigan State University in the U.S., and Moscow Institute of
Transportation in Russia. The MBA program aims to develop high performing rail leaders that are
capable of:
•
•
•
•

Understanding the rail sector in addition to policy and managerial innovations
Engaging stakeholders in change management (e.g. policy changes) that improves efficiency and
safety
Developing critical leadership skills
Identifying and seizing opportunities to enhance competitiveness and customer satisfaction 21

3. Analysis Findings
3.1

Issues Update from Prior Report - 2011

One of the primary data sources used in the development of the Railroad Industry Modal Profile, both in
2011 and for this study, is dialogs with stakeholders from across the railroad industry. Each
stakeholder’s unique perspective provides valuable insight into the challenges facing the industry, best
practices at addressing those challenges, and source of validation for issues found in industry literature.
Stakeholders from six major industry segments were consulted during the development of the modal
profile:







Academia: Faculty, staff at major colleges and institutions offering rail specific programs or
closely related fields of study.
Associations: Organizations serving the railroad industry, such as the Association of American
Railroads (AAR), or U.S. High Speed Rail Association (USHSR).
Class I Railroads: Major railroad companies which can be classified as Class I. They are the
majority of the railroad industry. Amtrak is also included in this group.
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA): An agency with the U.S. DOT that is responsible for
ensuring the safety, reliability, efficiency of the Nation’s railroad transportation system.
Unions: Major labor unions which represent the majority of the railroad workforce.
Short Line and Regional Railroads: All other railroads serving the country, including Class II,
and Class III railroads (many large firms that are just below the threshold for Class I
designation).

When the modal profile study was first performed in 2010, six workforce issues were identified across
the railroad workforce (Table 6) that informed the report-related discussions with the industry
stakeholders. While some of these concerns are still challenges for the railroad industry today, several of
these have diminished in significance and are not currently considered substantial issues. Each challenge
will be discussed briefly in this section, and those issues that are relevant at the time of this update will
be examined in section 3.2.
Table 6: Identified Workforce Challenges from 2011 Modal Profile

Workforce Challenges By Stakeholder
#

Workforce Challenge

1 Aging Workforce – Knowledge Transfer

Academia

Associations

Class
I

Class II
& III

FRA

Unions

▪

2 Workforce Diversity (Women, Minorities,
Other)
3 Overall Image of the Industry

▪

4 National Training Standards for Freight Rail
Trade and Craft Positions

▪

5 Work-Life Balance (Attrition in the 0-5
Year Population of Rail employees)
6 Quality of Data and Metrics Available to
Monitor Rail Industry Workforce Trends

▪

▪
▪

▪

▪
▪

3.1.1 Aging Workforce
This was the hallmark issue that led to calls for transportation-related industry studies such as the
Railroad Industry Modal Profile. For rail, these concerns were exacerbated by a workforce shortage of
30 – 40 year olds who could assume the duties of the retirees. Given the physical and demanding nature
of railroad work, common knowledge management approaches (i.e., sophisticated databases and systems
that can capture domain knowledge electronically for use across the enterprise) were not viable options,
which meant that the railroad industry’s situation appeared dire.
Based on our discussions with railroad company representatives, retirements are still occurring.
However, employee attrition due to retirement has not been as significant as initially predicted in the
2011 publication. Some suggest that the economic downturn caused workforces nationwide, including
the railroads, to stabilize because many retirement eligible employees chose to continue working.
Several stakeholders also indicated that railroads often attempt to hire retirees into other roles, which
could have mitigated exit risk and also aided in knowledge transfer.
3.1.2 Workforce Diversity
Diversity was studied broadly in the 2011 Railroad Industry Modal Profile and included ethnicity and
gender (age was considered separately); however, no formal metrics were provided or studied.
Additionally, public data related to the railroad industry workforce did not provide granular workforce
data beyond gender.
Stakeholders stated that their primary recruiting source, at that time, was employee referrals, which
helped boost employee loyalty but did not improve diversity. Currently, railroad data suggests that more
hires are occurring through recruiting departments, which may help overall diversity. Most railroads
have diversity recruiting initiatives and they offered insight into their efforts to attract and retain more
females. While no statistics were offered, participating stakeholders suggested that there had been some
improvement but added that much more work was needed in this area.
3.1.3 Overall Image of the Industry
Many of the stakeholders that supported the 2011 Railroad Industry Modal Profile have been concerned
that the public viewed the railroad industry as antiquated and “old fashioned” and this perception was
limiting interest in railroad careers among the Millennials entering the labor force. It was believed that
Millennials, beyond those with prior ties to the industry, would not be interested in rail careers because
they perceived it to be a fading industry.
Today, it appears that the industry’s image has improved. Many stakeholders credit AAR and CSX
commercials for establishing new interest in the value of rail to communities, which drove improvements
in how the industry was perceived. The railroads have indicated that there are currently no significant
challenges with attracting candidates for employment. However, the overall perception of the railroad
industry is still a concern and the industry still feels the need to highlight engineering and technical
advances to students and workers primarily in STEM fields. Finally, some stakeholders noted that the
recovering economy benefitted the railroad industry by mitigating the impact of the lingering perception
of the industry.
3.1.4 National Training Standards for Freight Rail Trade and Craft Positions
The union representatives that were involved in the 2011 Railroad Industry Modal Profile dialogs were
concerned with establishing training standards for the freight rail workforce that would be similar to
17

those that existed on the transit side of the industry. The FRA Railroad Safety Advisory Committee
(RSAC) is currently working the training issue, a point noted by several stakeholders consulted for this
study.
3.1.5 Work-Life Balance
In the 2011 Railroad Industry Modal Profile, many stakeholders stated that work-life balance was a
major issue in the railroad workforce. Long shifts and extensive travel topped the list of factors which
create an environment that makes it difficult for many employees to stay in a rail career. Attrition could
lead to half of an incoming class of employees resigning shortly after initial training was completed.
The dialogs held in support of this report suggest that work-life balance is still a major concern among
the railroads. Many of the Class I stakeholders stated that this problem is their top workforce
development-related issue.
3.1.6 Quality of Data and Metrics
In the 2011 Railroad Industry Modal Profile, the participants said they were unable to obtain the data that
was required to conduct a full analysis on the railroad industry workforce. At that time, it was not
possible to get complete data on the industry workforce that was earlier than two years old. Often, it was
impossible to determine whether a program or approach shared by a railroad industry stakeholder was
having an impact because current data was not yet available. This challenge still exists; however, more
data is available as this report is being developed than was available when the 2011 Railroad Industry
Modal Profile was developed. The AAR “Freight Rail Works” campaign provides a number of webbased data reports that are easily accessible. While this data cannot be leveraged to perform root-cause
analysis of the identified issues, this data does make it easier to quantify the volume of traffic and impact
of railroad services.
The AAR publishes a wealth of information about the railroad industry and much of the data in the 2011
and 2014 studies were taken from AAR data. However, to completely analyze the railroad industry
workforce requires more granularity (e.g., attrition rates, gender breakdowns, total population by
ethnicity) to arrive at some of the root-cause issues impacting the workforce. Additionally, many of the
publically available data sets on the railroad workforce are not published during the same timeframes
(i.e., different years), which hampers analysis. The addition of demographic data at an aggregate level
would be a benefit to studies such as this while still affording specific companies enough anonymity to
still fully control their respective approaches and improvement efforts.
3.1.7 Current Railroad Industry Workforce Issues – 2014
This section discusses the top issues identified in this study that present challenges to the railroad
industry workforce. Each issue noted here surfaced during stakeholder dialogs. As was done in the 2011
Railroad Industry Modal Profile, all dialog responses for the 2014 study were aggregated by stakeholder
category. The dialogs are an invaluable element of the study as they provide direct insight into the
workforce development experiences of those on the front-lines of the industry.
Based on the dialog with stakeholders that were conducted as part of this study, many of the issues
currently facing the railroad industry (see Table 7), are similar to those that were discussed identified in
the 2011 publication; however, the overall impact of each issue is reduced in significance since 2011.

Table 7: 2014 Railroad Industry Workforce Challenges

Workforce Challenge

Issue in 2011

Work-Life Balance

■

Aging Workforce

■

Recruiting (New)

Diversity

Generational Matriculation (New)

■

In each sub-section, an issue will be discussed and each stakeholder’s reaction will be depicted
graphically in a bar chart to illustrate that issue. Each bar is colored based on the degree of concern (from
red indicating concern to green indicating no concern). A gray colored bar indicates that no response was
provided and, as such, there was no data for analytical consideration.
3.1.8 Work-Life Balance
Work-life balance was the most
significant issue facing the railroad
workforce. Nearly every stakeholder
noted this as a concern, indicated by
the “red” and “yellow” bars in Figure
6. Additionally, some social media
posts from current rail workers
suggest that attrition among new hires
is still high, which indicates that while
overall attrition across the industry
appears to be below ten percent, the
attrition among employees with zero
to five years of experience may be
much higher.
Figure 5: Railroad Work-life Balance Sentiment by Stakeholder Category

Work-life balance is the ability of an
employee to accommodate their personal situation (e.g., spouses, children, dependents, etc.) given the
demands of the job. Typically, flexible work schedules and ability to request alternate work schedules
and locations are considered elements of work-life balance. Physically demanding jobs such as railroad
work do not easily accommodate such flexibility, though some stakeholders suggest that the view of
flexibility across the industry is dated and that some aspects of flexibility could be worked into railroad
employee life without sacrificing productivity.
While data was being gathered for this report, discussions about work-life balance centered on long
shifts and extensive travel requirements. Several stakeholders stated that these factors made the industry
appealing to only a small number of workers (e.g., those with few family responsibilities). This may also
contribute to the attrition of workers with less than five years of experience; once life progresses and
family dynamics change, the hours and travel become less appealing.
19

Figure 6 illustrates the sensitivity of this issue by stakeholder segment. In our current hiring climate,
where attrition rates seem stable and the economy is improved but not fully recovered, it can be easy to
view this issue as less significant. As the railroad workforce issues become more and more mainstream,
pressure will increase to offer a work experience that more closely aligns with those of other industries.
A slight improvement in the economy could quickly make this a critical issue again for the railroad
industry.
Ideas such as innovative shift scheduling arose as possible solutions but any such change requires tradeoffs, each of which may impact operating costs. As railroad recruiting continues to evolve and more and
more of the traditional workforce exits the industry, railroads may be forced to identify new ways to
maintain operations in a manner that offers more work-life balance than is common today.
3.1.9 Aging Workforce

Stakeholder Percentage

The aging workforce remains an issue for the railroad industry. Since industry retirees opted not to exit
the workplace all at once, the negative impact of the exit wave is delayed. While several of the railroad
company stakeholders suggested that they believe that retirements have already peaked, the current data
on average industry age indicates that there are still a large number of workers who are eligible for
retirement. As the 2011 Railroad
Industry Modal Profile stated,
Aging Workforce
departing from the workforce is a
100%
personal decision, and it is
80%
unrealistic to think that all seasoned
workers will decide to depart at the
60%
same time. However, as these
40%
workers continue to age, they will
20%
no longer be able to meet the
0%
physical demands of their jobs.
Class I
Academia Associations
Unions
Other
Figure 7 displays the attitudes of
Concern Some Concern No Concern No Opinion
stakeholders towards workforce
Industry Segment
aging in the railroad industry. Some
stakeholders did not provide an
Figure 6: Railroad Workforce Aging Sentiments by Stakeholder Category
opinion on this issue and, at best,
concern appeared to be mild in contrast to the amount of sentiment conveyed in the 2011 Railroad
Industry Modal Profile. Based on a typical attrition rate of fewer than ten percent over the past several
years, the current reaction seems understandable. However, the present reality should be viewed along
with the state of the economy and the technological changes occurring throughout the industry, which
drives training needs to the current workforce. In that context, there is an increased risk that as those
other market factors improve, the departure of the next grouping of retirement eligible workers may
happen sooner than anticipated, causing more of an impact on the workforce.
3.1.10 Workforce Diversity
Workforce diversity with regards to ethnicity and gender remains a concern for the railroad industry
specifically among Class I railroads and academia according to recent stakeholder dialogs. The
prevalence of this concern among the two segments may be attributed to the significant representation of
Class I railroad employees in the workforce and academia’s role in developing the rail workforce
20

pipeline. Figure 8 shows stakeholder sentiments about diversity, several had no opinion. Please Note:
Age diversity is analyzed separately.

Stakeholder Percentage

Between 1997 and 2010, railroad
gender representation was fairly
Workforce Diversity
constant at 90 percent male.
100%
This lack of gender diversity
80%
appears both in the railroad
60%
workforce and among the railroad
40%
academic programs (e.g., rail
20%
engineering, trades, etc.). Since
0%
only gender diversity metrics are
Class I
Academia Associations
Unions
Other
available, it is not currently
possible to determine the full
Concern Some Concern No Concern No Opinion
extent of the issue considering that
Industry Segment
workforce diversity covers a broad
spectrum of employee attributes.
Figure 7: Railroad Workforce Diversity Sentiments by Stakeholder Category
If the gender disparities are
considered independently, diversity is still significant for rail.
3.1.11 Recruiting

Stakeholder Percentage

The surfacing of recruiting as an
issue for the railroad workforce is a
Recruiting
good sign even though it is a
challenge for the railroad workforce.
100%
Figure 9 illustrates the responses
80%
from the stakeholders regarding
60%
recruiting. When stakeholders
40%
discussed recruiting, they indicated
20%
that the railroads are struggling to
0%
find potential employees that possess
Class I
Academia Associations Unions
Other
the appropriate STEM skills and
some of the specialty skills possessed
Concern Some Concern No Concern No Opinion
by welders and electricians. The new
Industry Segment
focus suggests that the industry is
recovering from the low levels of hiring
Figure 8: Railroad Recruiting Sentiments among Stakeholders by Category
in the 1990s and moving away from the
lingering concerns regarding the sizable
number of retirement eligible workers. However, in order to ensure that the railroads attract and retain
their share of STEM trained workers, the rail industry must be able to offer competitive benefits without
any hindrances to entry or career development. Issues such as work-life balance and diversity can
severely impair recruiting efforts, especially when the job market is competitive.
The stakeholder perspective on recruiting was widespread with Class I railroads being concerned with
specialty and STEM disciplines, and some of the other stakeholders speaking to concerns regarding
senior leadership succession and more composite employees (e.g., those with railroad experience
coupled with technological savvy to be able to handle new technologies currently implemented).
21

3.1.12 Generational Matriculation

Stakeholder Percentage

Recently, the railroad industry has received an influx of Millennials. Younger workers are reaping the
benefits of the current wave of retirements and receiving promotions much quicker, which may put them
in charge of older and more experienced co-workers despite having minimal management experience.
These factors create interesting dynamics for the railroad industry and more focus in this area may be
needed. It is notable that safety
issues over the past few years have
continued to decline, which
Generational Matriculation
suggests that railroads are ensuring
100%
that their new hire practices do not
80%
adversely impact safety. However,
60%
there may also be a need to
40%
increase focus on generational and
20%
workforce sensitivity issues to
0%
prevent any impact to operational
Class I
Academia Associations
Unions
Other
productivity over time. Figure 10
shows the stakeholders’ sentiment
Concern Some Concern No Concern No Opinion
about generational matriculation.
3.2

Industry Workforce
Development
Initiatives

Industry Segment

Figure 9: Railroad Sentiments Regarding Generational Matriculation by Category

This section highlights a few noteworthy rail industry training and development programs and STEM
programs. There are several other programs, not noted here, that are also contributing greatly to the
development of existing and future railroad talent.
3.2.1 Training and Development
The industry must ensure that prospective candidates possess the skills needed by railroad industry
employers. They must also provide the existing railroad workforce with the proper training to advance
professionally. Many employers (such as the Class I railroads) offer in-house training for employees,
including management trainee programs and specialized training for trade and craft positions. In
addition, collaboration between academia and Class I railroads furthers employee advancement and
helps to understand employer needs to equip prospects with the necessary skills to hit the ground running
once hired. Indicated below, are a few innovative training initiatives led by the industry currently.
CSX Railroad Education and Development Institute (REDI)
CSX REDI, located outside Atlanta, Georgia, offers novice and advanced specialized rail training which
emphasizes transportation, mechanics, engineering, and safety. Not only does the Institute train CSX
personnel, it also extends its curriculum to various external stakeholders, which leads to cohesive
operational and safety best practices throughout the industry.
National Academy of Railroad Sciences (NARS)
NARS, a partnership between Johnson County Community College (JCCC) in Overland Park, Kansas
and BNSF Railway, leads the industry in providing training and certifications to various rail
stakeholders. With seasoned industry professionals as instructors, NARS is able to offer hands-on
22

training relevant to multiple rail professions. NARS provides Mechanical Training, Transportation
Training, Engineering Training, and Signal/Telecom Training to interested professionals. 22
3.2.2 Pre K-12 and Collegiate Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics
Outreach
With growing national focus on the importance of STEM, especially among women 23, DOT has made
great strides in supporting efforts that allow students to develop proficiencies in STEM subjects. Further,
DOT recognizes that a qualified talent pipeline, capable of meeting future transportation workforce
demands, is needed. Following the lead of DOT, FRA also realizes the importance of improving the
perception of the rail industry and the career opportunities it offers. Thus, this section describes several
STEM related initiatives led or supported by DOT and the FRA.
Summer Transportation Internship Program for Diverse Groups (STIPDG)
STIPDG, led by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office of Civil Rights On-the-Job
Training Supportive Services Program, enables undergraduate students to obtain summer internships and
receive hands-on transportation related professional experience that aligns with their academic
pursuits. 24 The program also allows students to improve their understanding of the transportation
industry and industry-specific professions. Finally, the program provides opportunities for students to
establish a professional network comprised of fellow interns and DOT staff.
DOT Youth Employee STEM (YES) Mentoring Program
The YES Mentoring Program gives DOT employees the opportunity to mentor elementary, middle, and
high school students across the nation, expose them to transportation related occupations and technology,
and educate them on the importance of STEM and its applications in transportation. To support the YES
Mentoring Program, FRA’s Office of Research and Development coordinated a December 2013 field
trip to Amtrak Union Station for seven Chesapeake Math and IT (CMIT) Academy students, who were
preparing for the 2014 Future City Competition that was themed “Tomorrow’s Transit.” The trip aimed
to expand the students’ knowledge of various transportation modes, specifically transit and rail. In
addition to field trips like the one above, the employees of the FRA continuously seek opportunities to
expose youth in their local communities to the multitude of rail career opportunities and the importance
of STEM.
Transportation YOU
Transportation YOU is designed for female youth between the ages of 13 and 18, and it uses mentoring
opportunities to increase interest in STEM education and transportation related professions. The
program’s goals include:
• Educate and empower girls on opportunities in the transportation industry
• Connect girls with role models through one-on-one mentorship programs
• Provide internships and career development opportunities
• Assist girls in building leadership skills and self-confidence
• Assist in improving STEM education programs
• Assist in making STEM education more accessible through scholarship opportunities
• Build awareness of transportation as an exciting and rewarding career choice for girls
• Contribute to the diversity and creativity of the transportation workforce 25

4. Railroad Workforce Outlook
4.1

Future State of Rail

The future state of the railroad industry, per input from stakeholders, will include mild growth and
ongoing replacement of retirees. Several stakeholders believed that rapid growth is on the horizon
because rail is a “greener” way to ship goods and it reduces highway congestion. Expansion in multimodal shipments and increased demand from energy suppliers is also anticipated. Anticipated population
growth could lead to increased demand for rail services.
4.2

Efficiency and Technology

Because operations are becoming more efficient and new technologies are assisting with certain manual
tasks, increases in demand do not correspond to immediate increases in the workforce. Thus, the railroad
industry may be able to respond to increased demand without major shifts in operations. However, at the
same time, the current workforce will need to become technologically advanced. New services such as
High-Speed Rail and PTC will continue to infuse new technology into the industry and maintaining these
service capabilities will create new opportunities for workers.
4.3

Competing for Talent

The railroad industry will encounter increased competition for talent while the current workforce
challenges facing the industry, most significantly work-life balance and diversity, will become more
important. A potential marketing strategy for rail may be to capitalize on the national push to be healthier
and more active. Given that railroad occupations are in large part outdoors, involve travel and working
with heavy equipment, there could be an alignment between staying healthy and rail careers. Railroad
careers have physical activity integrated into the work day, which many other industries cannot offer.
4.4

High-Speed Rail

High-speed rail continues to evolve nationally, with the first signs of operational capability emerging in
California, Texas, and Florida. As of December 2013, a large number of infrastructure development
efforts have been funded and initiated, principally through federal grant programs. It is uncertain how
this capability will transform the national economy, but high-speed rail may open up segments of the
labor force that otherwise would not be reachable for many cities.
Early estimates suggest that high-speed rail operations may begin as early as 2017, which could
potentially bring permanent jobs to the industry and bolster interest on other national high-speed rail
projects. While not all states that currently have high-speed rail programs have begun detailed workforce
planning, California’s planning may offer the best glimpse into the total projected jobs from its new
high-speed rail networks. In a report 26 about the impact of high-speed rail on the California economy, it
was estimated that a steady-state 5,000 workers would support the high-speed rail system for the state.
By scaling for size, the total impact by state can be estimated and then used to project total anticipated
hires for the system.
Given those projections, state DOTs should consider the workforce issues that are associated with highspeed rail while they are planning their infrastructures. The FRA-sponsored HSRLS, which is currently
in the prototype phase, may be a promising option for states that need access to relevant railroad and
high-speed rail training. If they do not consider workforce needs early in their high-speed rail program,
24

states may lack the talent to staff the new service corridors or a temptation to hire under-qualified
workers.
4.5

Positive Train Control (PTC)

Currently, Class I railroads must implement PTC by December 31, 2015. PTC is an integrated collection
of systems (including wireless technology, computers, advanced railroad wayside sensors, monitoring,
and control systems) that will enable trains to stop or slow automatically before certain types of
accidents occur. PTC is complex and involves connecting many disparate systems. However, successful
deployment should have a measureable impact on railroad safety. PTC implementation is progressing but
there are a number of systems integration challenges that still require research and development 27. Since
all systems must be interoperable, an additional layer of complexity is being added to the deployment.
PTC technology will usher in a host of new jobs, which will include the personnel who will install and
maintaining the various systems as well as the operators who will be monitoring railroad traffic.
4.6

Railroad Workforce Outlook

The BLS suggests that the job outlook for rail will be relatively flat, largely because the opportunities
created will probably be replacements for retirees rather than new positions. Further, BLS suggests that
advances in productivity may negatively impact the workforce as fewer workers will be needed to
address the same or even larger amount of work.
Based on the analysis conducted for this report, the BLS assessment appears to be somewhat
conservative. There will likely be some growth, but it will not be quantitatively significant until highspeed rail becomes operational. Figure 11 below contains a projection of the growth in the railroad
industry’s workforce over the next five years. The year-over-year increase constitutes about one percent
annually and the impact of high-speed rail is not considered. Consistent with the BLS assessment,
technological advances (e.g., PTC) may result in fewer jobs created while overall productivity continues
to increase.

Figure 10: Five-Year Railroad Workforce Population Projection

5. Conclusion
The railroad workforce continues to strengthen and adapt to the expectations of the labor market. As
with all vibrant industries, innovation must continue if long-term viability is possible. Rail has certainly
demonstrated its staying power and all indicators suggest this trend will continue. The challenge for rail
seems to be conveying the historical significance and importance of the rail industry to the “new” labor
force.
The industry would benefit from sharing its value proposition to the American economy and continuing
to focus on re-branding and more public transparency. It seems that significant strides are being made by
the AAR Freight Rail Works campaign and advertisements by some of the railroads, but additional effort
is needed. Some of the workforce challenges that persist in the industry, specifically, those pertaining to
work-life balance, should be confronted head-on with innovative approaches and solutions from nontraditional sources such as the military.
Younger generations are growing up with social media, video games, information about nearly
everything at their finger-tips, and regular availability of computers and mobile devices. Now that
railroad industry recruiting is facing the same concerns as most U.S. corporations, railroad firms should
recalibrate as well. Rail companies should look ahead and begin to prepare for the expectations and
demands of the next generation. This may give the industry time to confront its traditional mindset (e.g.,
work-life balance and diversity challenges) and become a truly attractive career choice for next
generation workers. Much like cars, planes, ships, and tanks, trains have a natural appeal and can be
inspiring, but that may not be enough to convince the up and coming labor force to choose railroad
careers. An unwillingness to adapt or change fast enough could be a missed opportunity for a remarkable
and history-rich segment of the transportation industry.

Appendix A. “An Examination of Employee Recruitment and Retention in
the U.S. Railroad Industry” Study Findings
In 2007, the FRA Office of Policy and Program Development conducted a study entitled An
Examination of Employee Recruitment and Retention in the U.S. Railroad Industry to identify the
recruitment and retention challenges facing the U.S. freight railroad industry, due to the increase in the
retirement-eligible population and the growth in freight railroad transportation. Several industry
stakeholders participated in the study through structured interviews and focus groups. It was determined
that recruiting new personnel was a challenge due to the lack of work-life balance and this lack of
balance was due to demanding work schedules, the incremental pay rate system for particular craft
positions, and the availability of a pipeline to train and develop qualified talent. The study also
determined that relocation, furloughs, misperceptions of job functions, and demanding work schedules
made it difficult for the industry to retain talent.
General Findings
•
•

Employee demographics will continue to match the areas or regions across the country in which
employees are hired and work. The result is likely to be greater ethnic and racial diversity within
the railroad industry over time, matching trends across the country as a whole.
The railroad industry will need to accommodate the various and disparate needs of multiple
generations of employees. As the participating Human Resources representatives mentioned in
our discussions, the newest generation of railroad employees appears to have different priorities
than previous generations. Railroads, since they are large employers with multiple generations of
employees, will need to adjust to and be able to accommodate the needs of its complex
workforce.

Recruitment Successes
•

•

The Internet has become a critical recruitment tool in the U.S. freight railroad industry. Most, if
not all, Class I railroads require those interested in a job to apply online. Prospective employees
are referred to a railroad’s Web site. Furthermore, the Internet is becoming a major marketing
and advertising tool. Railroads are placing more and more information about available jobs on
their own Web sites and are advertising jobs on other Web sites, including job placement and
railroad related sites.
Employee referrals, i.e., word of mouth, are still a major source of new hires. Many focus group
participants indicated that they would recommend a railroad job to friends or family, and in fact,
some already have. This recommendation; however, may depend on the person and their specific
situation.
The U.S. Class I railroad industry has found recent success by partnering with the U.S. Military
and the National Academy of Railroad Sciences (NARS). Among the possible explanations for
the industry’s success in recruiting former members of the military is that the railroad industry
and the military share similar job attributes, such as 24/7 operations, using heavy equipment, and
working in the outdoors. NARS provides technical training and education to individuals
preparing for a career in the railroad industry.
According to focus group participants, railroad benefits, especially health insurance, retirement,
and salary, are major attractions to working for the industry.
27

Recruitment Challenges
•
•
•

•

Adjusting work schedules to achieve an attractive work–life balance
Overcoming an incremental pay scale for some crafts
Finding individuals with the right skill sets for the job. For example, railroads prefer to hire
carmen with welding experience and signalmen with technical (electronics) backgrounds. Further
complicating this problem are certain rural areas where a railroad operates and where the
working-age population is relatively small.
Attracting women to the industry. Railroads reported that many of the jobs women filled in the
past have been eliminated (e.g., clerical positions); furthermore, railroads felt that many of the
blue collar jobs that the railroad industry does have to offer may be less appealing to women.

Retention Successes
•
•

Common features that many focus group participants liked about their job included the job
variety, their coworkers, the pay and benefits, the lack of direct supervision, and a feeling of job
security.
Most focus group respondents intend to make a career out of working for the railroad industry
and were generally satisfied with their jobs. Factors that were identified that will affect their
decision to stay or leave include changes to benefits (e.g., if employees have to pay more for their
benefits), pay (e.g., a lack of pay raises), and work schedules, including furloughs.

Retention Challenges
•
•
•
•

•
•

•

Hiring individuals locally rather than forcing employees to relocate to undesirable locations
Reducing or eliminating furloughs
Providing realistic job previews
Improving work schedules. Suggestions included greater predictability and less time away from
home. Further, according to focus group participants, working for the railroad industry creates a
strain on family relationships and has caused some focus group participants to lose friends
because of their work schedules and unavailability. The upshot is that many focus group
participants noted developing strong friendships with those with whom they work.
Common features that many focus group participants disliked about their job included work
schedules, labor–management animosity, and issues related to pay.
Generally, if an employee leaves the railroad industry, he/she does so within the first 5 years or
so of employment. Representatives from the Class I railroads gave the following reasons for the
drop off in withdrawals: railroad employees become fully vested in their retirement benefits after
5 years, employees receiving incremental pay receive 100 percent of their salary after 5 years,
employees have become familiar with the railroad lifestyle and have accepted this lifestyle after 5
years, and employees have had positive exposure to older employees who have made a career out
of working for the industry. U.S. Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) data support this observation.
These key findings provide a snapshot of many of the recruitment and retention issues currently
facing the U.S. freight railroad industry. Given the qualitative nature of the research; however, no
one key finding should be viewed more or less important than any other key finding.

Abbreviations and Acronyms
AAR

Association of American Railroads

AARS

American Association of Railroad Superintendents

AASHTO

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

APTA

American Public Transportation Association

ARASA

American Railway and Airway Supervisors Association

AREMA

American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association

ASLRRA

American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association

ASME

American Society of Mechanical Engineers

ATDA

American Train Dispatchers Association

BLET

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen

BLS

Bureau of Labor Statistics

BMWED

Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees Division

BRS

Brotherhood of Railway Signalmen

CFR

Code of Federal Regulations

CMIT

Chesapeake Math and IT

CUTC

Council of University Transportation Centers

DOT

Department of Transportation

FHWA

Federal Highway Administration

FRA

Federal Railroad Administration

FRA-WDT

FRA Railroad Administration Workforce Development Team

GCC

Graphics Communications Conference

HSRLS

High Speed Rail Learning System

IBT

International Brotherhood of Teamsters

ICC

Interstate Commerce Commission

JCCC

Johnson County Community College

JRC

Joint Rail Conference

MARC

Maryland Area Regional Commuter

NARP

National Association of Railroad Passengers

NARS

National Academy of Railroad Sciences

NARS

National Academy of Railroad Sciences

NCRRP

National Cooperative Rail Research Program
29

NURail

National University Rail

Operating Administration

OLI

Operation Lifesaver, Incorporated

OST

Office of the Secretary of Transportation

PTC

Positive Train Control

R&D

Research and Development

RailTEC

Rail Transportation and Engineering Center

REDI

Railroad Education and Development Institute

REES

Railway Engineering Education Symposium

RPD

Railroad Policy and Development

RRB

Railroad Retirement Board

SME

Subject Matter Expert

STB

Surface Transportation Board

STEM

Science, Technology, Engineering and Math

STIPDG

Summer Transportation Internship Program for Diverse Groups

TCIU

Transportation Communications International Union

TRB

Transportation Research Board (TRB)

TTCI

Transportation Technology Center, Incorporated

TTD

Transportation Trades Department

TWU

Transportation Workers Union of America

UIUC

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

United States

USDOT

United States Department of Transportation

USHSR

United States High Speed Rail

UTC

University Transportation Center

UTU

United Transportation Union

YES

Youth Employee STEM

References
The document’s references are listed below:
1

“Section D Employment and Compensation Statistics.” Financial, Actuarial & Annual Railroad Retirement Act &
Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act Data. U.S. Railroad Retirement Board. Aug. 2014. Web. 1 Apr. 2015.
.
Association of American Railroads. Railroad Facts 2013 Edition. Washington: Policy and Economics Department,
2013. Print.
Surface Transportation Board (STB). Employment Data. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.

Surface Transportation Board (STB). Employment Data. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.

Amtrak National Facts. AMTRAK. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.

Amtrak National Facts. AMTRAK. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.
Association of American Railroads. Railroad Facts 2013 Edition. Washington: Policy and Economics Department,
2013. Print.
Association of American Railroads. Railroad Facts 2013 Edition. Washington: Policy and Economics Department,
2013. Print.

Association of American Railroads. Railroad Facts 2013 Edition. Washington: Policy and Economics Department,
2013. Print.

Who Are The Teamsters?. Teamsters North America’s Strongest Union. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.
“The Transportation Communications Union: A Union of Unions, Dedicated to Progress and Prosperity for All
Members,” Transportation Communications Union (TCU). Web 3 Feb. 2014.
.
TTD Member Unions. Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. Occupational Employment Statistics. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.
Home. National University Rail Center (NURail). Web. 3 Feb. 2014. .
Home. National University Rail Center (NURail). Web. 3 Feb. 2014. .

Railroad Conductor Technology. Dakota County Technical College. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.

Railroad Engineering. Gateway Community College. Web. 3 Feb. 2014. .

Railroad Training Programs. Johnson County Community College. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.

Railroad Operations. Metropolitan Community College (MCC). Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.

Railroad Dispatcher. Tarrant County College. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.

Railway Global Executive MBA. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.
The National Academy of Railroad Sciences. NARS. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.

Education for K-12 Students. The White House. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.

About. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
.

About. Transportation You. Web. 3 Feb. 2014. .
Estimating Workforce Development Needs for High-Speed Rail in California, Mineta Transportation Institute
(MTI, 1027). Web. March 2012. http://transweb.sjsu.edu/PDFs/research/1027-california-high-speed-railworkforce-needs-bf.pdf
Class I Railroads Rate the State of Positive Train Control, Progressive Railroading. Web. March 2013.

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/ptc/article/Class-I-railroads-rate-the-state-of-positive-train-control--35442

File Type	application/pdf
Author	Monique.Stewart@dot.gov
File Modified	2020-11-18
File Created	2020-11-18