Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormer
I disagree. They will move if they are fully compensated and they do not lose access to customers. It would probably be safer for them as well. They do not like colliding with semis either.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by North_Regina_Boy
Also considering tighter federal regulations, OH&S, lawsuits, loss of revenue, downtime, better public image. I think there are many reasons the railways may be reasonable.
|
I agree that the railways will consider participating, but it will be on their terms... and with zero direct cost to them (and near-zero indirect cost). On those terms, they will participate.
If it comes to an outlay of money, or significant changes to schedules, or in any way altering their business, nope. Not going to involve themselves. Why would they? What's the upside for them? There's really no real OH&S or lawsuits related to that crossing, and downtime associated with collisions is minimal (and this single crossing is immaterial to them). Federal regulation won't focus on at-grade crossings, I'd bet. So, public image is the only driver...