Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

absolutely modern, up-to-date, new type of mass transit system which is some years away, but not too many.

Senator PASTORE. Thank you very much for a very excellent statement.

Is Mr. Beebe here? Mr. BEEBE. Yes. Senator PASTORE. We are glad to have you here, Mr. Beebe. Mr. BEEBE. Thank you. My name is William A. Beebe. I am the legislative representative for the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen.

(The statement of William A. Beebe follows:) STATEMENT OF WILLIAM A. BEEBE, STATE REPRESENTATIVE, STATE LABOR COUNCIL

AFL-CIO

I appear before you today as a representative of the State Labor Council AFLCIO of the State of Connecticut. We would like to be recorded as supporting any or a combination of any bills which, in the judgment of your committee, would provide Federal funds as a last-ditch means of saving the rail service on the New Haven.

The freight services of the New Haven are vitally important to the economy of Connecticut and the continuing passenger deficit may endanger the entire system. The one is inseparable from the other. At present, lack of available cash threatens the very day-by-day existence of the line.

Labor, therefore, is not only concerned with the nearly 10,000 railroad jobs involved, but the tens of thousands of jobs in industries where the less expensive rail service is figured in the cost of the product. This rail service includes the shipment of raw materials into the plant as well as the outgoing finished products. Consequently, rail service is an indispensable requisite to industries in the highly competitive fields such as heavy industry, chemicals, oil, coal, and the like. If their only alternative is to use the more expensive motor carrier service they would either shift the work to plants out of the State or relocate entirely in an area providing a rail line.

All of this is part of the record of the ICC hearing finance docket No. 21989 relative to the Penn-Central merger held in Boston May 20, 1963.

Moreover, the loss of the $72 million railroad payroll, coupled with millions paid to employees of industries adversely affected, would deal a staggering blow to the economy of the several States involved.

Last year the railroad carried nearly 20 million tons of freight. Assuming the average truck carries 20 tons per load, this would mean the use of nearly 1 million more trucks on our highways in addition to those already operating. The result would be chaotic.

Last year the line carried nearly 26 million passengers. If these passengers were compelled to use private cars and buses the States and the Federal Government would then be required to provide funds for more highway construction and their maintenance.

It seems rather incongrous that the Federal agencies will spend billions of dollars attempting to place a man on the moon, and judging by the testimony given yesterday of the Under Secretary of Commerce, is reluctant to assist in the transporting of its taxpaying citizenry from their homes to their places of employment. An aditorial appearing in a New York newspaper yesterday stated that Uncle Sam is loaning East Pakistan $8.7 million for their railroad. It seems to us if money is available that charity should begin at home.

This is not to say that the States involved do not have a large responsibility, for indeed they do. Admittedly they have except for Connecticut-done little or nothing at all. As of late they have come to life and are manifesting sincere efforts toward formulating a plan.

However, we feel it altogether appropriate at this time that the Federal Government should assume the leadership, and insure that all parties concerned will bring about a truly effective and permanent solution to this problem.

In closing, allow me to reaffirm our position in assuring you the support of our organization toward any bill which, in your judgment, will effect this end. Let me thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee.

Senator PASTORE. Thank you very much, sir, for an excellent statement.

I understand that representatives of the trustees are here.

I ask this question of them, if they are prepared to give me an answer on it. If not, they can put it in the record.

How many people are employed by the New Haven?
Mr. DORIGAN. Just shortly under 10,000.
Senator PASTORE. Nine thousand ?
Mr. DORIGAN. 9,750—in that neighborhood.

Senator PASTORE. Have you any breakdown at all, if the railroad was shut down, the passenger service, how many jobs that will affect?

Mr. DORIGAN. No, we have not got that.

Senator PASTORE. I hope that is possible to get it. If it is possible, I would like to have that in the record. Mr. DORIGAN. Very well, sir.

Senator PASTORE. I requested certain information, and I have been told here by Mr. Fogarty, a member of the staff, that that has been furnished.

It is a supplemental exhibit, furnished for the record, at the request of the committee.

If there is no objection, I ask that it be placed in the record of the hearing at this point. SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBITS FURNISHED AT REQUEST OF SENATE COMMERCE COMMITTEE

EXHIBIT A
Number of passenger trains operatedOperating timetable No. 19,

normal weekday
LOCAL TRAINS

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Ticketed passengers between Providence and New York (year ending November

1961)

11

M

arch------

Number

Number of rides 1964-Continued

of rides 1963: December-----

20, 518
July -------------

16, 788 1964:

August-------

18, 897 January-----

18, 925
September------

16, 267 February----17, 331 October------

18, 208 March, 16, 628 November.--

15, 761 April --

16, 089 May--

17, 802
Total.-----

210, 665 June--

17, 451 | Passengers between Boston and New York (year ending November 1964) Number of

Number of passengers 1964Continued

passengers 1963: December----60, 253 July -------------

46, 094 1964:

August--------

46, 947 January----49, 341 September---

40, 499 February---

45, 554
October------

40, 823 42, 836 November --

35, 080 April------

41, 589 May-------46, 088 Total

538, 798 June.

43, 694

EXHIBIT D

March-----

-------

Statement of interstate passenger fare changes of the classes shown,

194764, inclusive

Class of fare

Description of fare change

1 way

Commuta

tion

10 ride

Sept. 18, 1947

July 24, 1953

Aug. 15, 1954

1st class increased from 3.3 to 3.5 cents per mile; coach class increased from 2.2 to 2.5 cents per mile..--.

Apr. 17, 1947 60 ride increased 25 percent with maximum of $6; 46 ride

established at 15 percent above former 60-ride fare with maximum of $4.50..-Coach class increased 15 percent to 2.875 cents per mile; 1st class unchanged.

Dec. 15, 1947 1st class increased from 3.5 to 4 cents per mile; coach class increased from 2.875 to 3 cents per mile..--

July 15, 1948 Ist class increased from 4 to 4.5 cents per mile in sleeping

cars; 1st class in parlor cars remained at 4 cents per mile;

coach class increased from 3 to 3.375 cents per mile.. ------ Dec. 1, 1949 10 ride established between Boston and Pawtucket and

Central Falls also Providence on basis of $0.0264 per mile. 10 ride extended to apply for distances not to exceed 40 miles

also between New York and specified stations more than 40 miles distant.------------1st class in sleeping cars and parlor cars increased 5 percent with minimum of 20 cents; sleeping cars from 4.5 to 4.725 cents and parlor cars from 4 to 4.2 cents per mile; coach class increased 5 percent with minimum of 5 cents, from 3.375 to 3.544 cents per mile.. ------

May 1, 1956 10 ride increased 5 percent with minimum increase of 50

cents. ---46 ride for minimum distance of 4 miles increased 25 percent;

for each mile of progression, arbitraries were added to the fare for previous mileage distance; 60 ride made 5 percent higher than 46 ride (established as above) for correspond

ing distances. ----------------Ist class increased 5 percent from 4.725 to 4.961 cents per mile; 1st class in parlor cars discontinued resulting in an increase from 4.2 to 4.961 cents per mile; coach class in

creased 5 percent from 3.544 to 3.721 cents per mile.------- Feb. 17, 1957 10 ride increased 5 percent.... 1st class increased 5 percent from 4.961 to 5.209 cents per mile; coach class increased 5 percent from 3.721 to 3.907 cents per mile.

--- Nov. 1, 1957 60-ride and 46-ride commutation increased 10 percent... 10 ride increased 5 percent....

[blocks in formation]

11

Nov. 1, 1957

-- Nov. 1, 1957 Statement of interstate passenger fare changes of the classes shown, THE NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN & HARTFORD RAILROAD Co.,

1947-64, inclusive-Continued

Class of fare

Description of fare change

1 way

Commuta

tion

10 ride

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

1

[ocr errors]

1
1

[blocks in formation]

1
1

Mar. 6, 1961

1
1

[merged small][ocr errors]

1st class increased 5 percent from 5.209 to 5.469 cents per mile;

coach class increased 5 percent from 3.907 to 4.102 cents per

mile--60-ride and 46-ride commutation increased 5 percent.10-ride increased 5 percent.... 1st class increased 5 percent from 5.469 to 5.742 cents per mile;

coach class increased 5 percent from 4.102 to 4.307 cents

per m ile....---------------------------------------------60-ride and 46-ride commutation fares to and from New York

City also between Boston and stations in Rhode Island lower than New York Central fares for comparable distances increased to the level of N.Y.C. fares.---. 10-ride increased to 85 percent of 10 times the l-way coach

fare. -----1st class and coach class increased percent not to exceed

10 cents.---60-ride and 46-ride commutation increased 10 percent.--10-ride increased approximately 8.5 cents per ride account of

being based on 1-way fares which were increased 10 percent

with maximum of 10 cents..--1st class and coach class increased 5 percent. 60-ride and 46-ride commutation increased 10 percent.------10-ride increased approximately 5 percent.-----1st class and coach class increased 5 cents.----60-ride and 46-ride commutation increased 10 percent.----10-ride-The increase of 5 cents in 1-way fares increased

these fares proportionately as they were based on thel-way

coach fares. --10-ride calendar week commutation established on basis of

25 percent of adult 46-ride commutation fare.-----10-ride unrestricted ticket limit changed from 6 months to 30

days to avoid payment of 10 percent Federal transportation tax. Fares to apply between stations up to 125 miles

apart..-60-ride and 46-ride monthly and 10-ride weekly; commutation

increased 10 percent.. 10-ride unrestricted Account 10 percent increase in commutation fares, adjustment was made in 10-ride fares for distances 6.5 to 19.5 miles inclusive to prevent diversion

from commutation..----60-ride commutation canceled; 46-ride commutation tickets made valid for passage on Sundays; 10-ride calendar week

commutation canceled.------1st class and coach class increased 10 percent account repeal of

the 10 percent Federal transportation tax..-. 10-ride unrestricted ticket limit extended to 60 days. Between New York City and main line stations to New London and Windsor Locks, also on New Canaan, Danbury, and Waterbury branches, fares reduced on basis of 5 times the 2-day round trip fare plus 50 cents in an endeavor to provide a ticket which would be attractive enough to appeal to patrons now purchasing a series of 2-day round trip tickets...

[blocks in formation]

NOTE.-Similar fare changes were made for intrastate traffic on the same or subsequent dates.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

New Haven, Conn., March 17, 1965. Hon. JOHN O. PASTORE, New Senate Office Building, Washington, D.O.

DEAR SENATOR PASTORE: You will recall that at the Commerce Committee hearings held in New Haven on March 11, the trustees agreed to furnish the committee with certain data concerning the number of employees who would be affected by elimination of the New Haven's passenger service.

As of March 1, 1965, some 9,600 persons were employed by the New Haven. of this number it is estimated that almost one-half, or approximately 4,500 would no longer be required by the road if all passenger service were discontin ured. This number includes personnel assigned exclusively to passenger service plus an estimate of the employees not specifically involved in passenger service whose number would be reduced if passenger operations ceased.

This figure does not include personnel who are employed by other railroads at joint passenger facilities, such as Grand Central Terminal in New York City, Springfield, Mass., Station, Pennsylvania Station in New York City, and Boston Terminal Corp. at South Station in Boston, whose number would undoubtedly be reduced if those terminal facilities were operated without any need to service New Haven passenger operations.

It is anticipated that at the time the New Haven trustees apply to the Interstate Commerce Commission for the discontinuance of all passenger service, they will have a more detailed breakdown of the figures which are cited above. Accordingly, the above figures should be considered an approximation based on present estimates which are in the process of refinement. Very truly yours,

H. W. DORIGAN.

THE NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN & HARTFORD RAILROAD Co.,

New Haven, Conn., March 23, 1965. Hon. JOHN O. PASTORE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.O.

DEAR SENATOR PASTORE: I am writing to you concerning a so-called direct subsidy to the New Haven Railroad for the maintenance of its passenger service. I am doing this for a number of reasons. The first and primary one is because of your abiding interest in the destinies of the New Haven and because of your leadership in attempting to find some solution. A second reason is that at the recent Commerce Committee hearings, over which you presided, a question was raised, perhaps by you, as to whether there was any precedent for a direct Federal subsidy for passenger service.

There is, for example, in relation to the airlines and helicopter service.

Before taking this matter up, I believe it would clarify matters if we examine into the meaning of subsidy. As New Haven's evidence at the Commerce Committee hearings showed, our passenger service has operated at a deficit for a great many years. In other words, the public who were using the New Haven passenger service were not paying for the full cost of the service. The public was being subsidized. A very rough example, for instance, would be that a passenger was obtaining a ride costing say $1.50, but paying only $1.20. When our freight service was profitable, the freight service was directly subsidizing the public who rode the New Haven. When the freight service dwindled to a point that it was no longer capable of absorbing the passenger deficit, the creditors of the New Haven began subsidizing the New Haven passengers, and certainly since the inception of the reorganization, about 312 years ago, the New Haven's creditors have subsidized the riding public. This state of affairs cannot continue indefinitely. One, economics will not permit; and two, the law of the land forbids. It is time for the public, in one way or another, to pay for the passenger service that it wants continued. This will not constitute a subsidy to the New Haven. It will merely reimburse the New Haven for performing a service which it is now required to do. If Federal and/or State governments make up the deficit, the New Haven will be reimbursed; and the public will be subsidized by the governmental authorities.

Turning now to an example of airline precedent for so-called direct subsidy, I enclose a memorandum prepared, at my request, by Mr. Coyle, the New Haven's comptroller. It shows, among other things, a direct Federal contribution to Allegheny Air Lines of approximately $6,500,000 in 1962 and approxi

« AnteriorContinuar »