When they were economically regulated, all railroads belonged to regional associations The associations were geographical and over lapped, so most railroads belonged to more than one. The associations and their tariff bureaus were the controlling factors for rates and routes. They were the forums in which the railroads agreed as to who would carry what where and for how much. The associations included New England, Official, Trunk Line, Southern, Central, MidWest, South West, Mountain and Psacific -- and there were more. Before the interstates and the jet engine, most freight moved by rail at least part of the way, and there was no intermodal to speak of. The regulatory climate ( the ICC ) was to foment competition within modes by preventing carriers from eating each other alive and forcing them to cooperate and compete -- and by preventing them from branching into other modes. Every item that moved went from some specific place to some other specific place on an applicable rate and that rate was goverend by routing agreements arrived at and agreed upon by the associations' tariff bureaus.. Different route, different rate. There would be a number of rates on that item published in different tariffs. Under ICC rules, the applicable rate was the lowest one that met all the size, weight, routing and other requirements in the tariffs. All tariffs had to be filed with the ICC. To the extent that the railroads were voluntary members of the associations (they had no choice, actually) they agreed voluntarily on all provisions and restrictions published by the associations. They were all equal, in theory; however, some were more equal than others. The ICC was the forum for arguing that equality by both carriers and the shipping public. Tariff changes required a minimum of 30 days' notice. Protest and argument could extend the process by years. All modes had similar regulation. Limited entry -- you had to prove yourself fit, willing and able to perform the service for which you sought permission. Economic stability -- no predatory rates designed to destroy competitors; no "whipsawing" of rates to promise customers one level of cost and then hit them with a higher one. Limited exit -- you couldn't get out without proving irreperable loss. It was bulky and cumbersome, but it was stable. Everyone knew what it was going to cost to move the freight. We had too many railroads competing with too many truck lines for diminishing amounts of freight because more and more was/is coming in from overseas. Then deregulaton happened. Randy Brown - -------------------------------------------------------------- I'd like to see that. Either that's all the Central would agree to (since Erie had the more direct route to the midwest), or there was some reciprocal, equally restrictive rights arrangement elsewhere. Paul B The restrictions in the Newberry Junction agreement cannot be blamed on the ICC (though there is a trainload of guilt on that gang in what they did to our national railroad system). The Erie voluntarily negotiated the Newberry Agreement, territorial restrictions and all. Since it is an item I'll try and get some more info for you. MJC The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List Sponsored by the ELH&TS http://www.elhts.org ------------------------------
This HTML page is © 2000-2009 Blue Moon Online System and The Railfan Network
This page and the data contained therein may not be reproduced
for any form of commercial use without the explicit permission
of J. Henry Priebe Jr. or his duly authorized agent.