Too Many Corners Cut on Railroad Safety

[Anonymous]

With the number of train accidents seemingly on the rise, such as the head on collision between BNSF and UP trains in Texas a few weeks ago, it seems to me that too many corners have been and are being cut on safety, just to fatten the corporate bottom line. The train and engine crews involved in such accidents are seen as sacraficial lambs to be sacraficed all in the name of profit and to keep the Wall Street cokeheads happy and well supplied with Columbia's finest. The state of the track structure on the nation's railroads is approaching the worn out state that the railroads found themselves in after World War 2 had ended. Not only that, but crews on the trains are being pushed past the breaking point, not only on freight trains, but Amtrak and many commuter trains as well. Same goes for the dispatchers who try as they may, keep the trains from running into one another . Another example of a safety corner being cut was the recent introduction of remote controlled locomotives into yard operations without any thought being given to what would happen if terrorists got their hands on one along with the control box. A 200 ton locomotive could pack one hell of a bomb if so used by terrorists. No thought is given to this as the Wall Street Stooges who supposedly manage the nation's railroads seek to cut costs where ever they can. I can understand the need to make a profit, but playing Russian Roulette with people's lives as the use of remote control locomotives and running trains with minimal crews as is the case now is another matter. Not only that, but maintenance of way departments are so understaffed that much track is in such condition now that I am surprised that passenger trains are even allowed to operate over it. Not only are maintenance of way and operating departments understaffed, but the communications and signald departments as well. It makes me wonder if radio failures on the trains are contributing to some of the catestrophic accidents that so often make the news. Add in the hazardous nature of some of the cargoes handled by the railroads, and you have a recipe for a ma ss casualty disaster in some major city around the country. The type of disaster with the potential of making the 9-11 attacks seem like minor league stuff by comparison. Either management does not know or do they even care. YOu have to have an adequate number of people staffing the railroads to have anywhere near the safe operation that you should have. Cutting corners by means of the use of remote controlled switch engines only adds to the hazards to the railroad personnel and to the public at large. If this country were to get railroading back to the level of safety it should be, then complete housecleaning of each carrier's (mis)management structure would seem to be in order. In other words, replace the Wall Street stooges with personnel with years of operational experience on a given railroad, personnel who DO know the business, NOT think they know the railroad business. The potential for ruinous wrongful death suits against the railroads and their management is far too real to allow corners to continue to be cut on safety. Far too many good crew members and public citizens have died because of it. Need it go on?

[tree68]

Quite a rant.

The seventh word of your post sums up the veracity of your information.

The media are always glad to play a sob story. Good news doesn't sell anything. You can do something a thousand times with no problems and you might get an inside inch in the paper - IF you were somehow recognized for the accomplishment. On the other hand, if something goes wrong, it's banner headline time.

If you look at REAL statistics, I think you'll find that things are not going to hell in a handbasket. There are always ups and downs, and we all know that "things come in threes." But an isolated series of events does not make up a trend. Safety is important to everyone, especially the guy in the trenches, whose life depends on it.

For sure, failures do occur. Miscommunication, lapses of attention, even equipment malfunctions are a part of life. Show me a railroader who goes to work saying "I'm gonna have an accident today." There are failsafes built into the system. They may not always perform as planned, but they are there.

As for the maintenance, I think you'll find that the track is in pretty good shape where it needs to be. A slow order costs the railroad money, and they do know that. Don't look at an overgrown siding or little used branch line and equate it to the NorthEast Corridor.

I can neither confirm nor deny that there are people in railroad management who shouldn't be there. But a railroad is still a business, and as such will usually conform to the business model of the day. Shortsightedness is not limited to the railroads. It's easy to sit here and condemn the business acumen of anyone. Just like running a locomotive, it's not as easy as it may appear.

RCL, safety issues notwithstanding, is no more a threat to national security than any other loco. A determined group or individual could just as easily steal a non-RC loco. Witness some of the runaways that have occured over the past few years, with no one on board at all. It would have been very difficult to pull off the OKC bombing with a loco. That's not to say that it can't happen, but you'll find that security is tighter than you might think. For my part, I'd be more worried about that rental van on the highway. Terrorist or not, you have no idea what he might be carrying.

And if you want a real scare about what's being carried around in this country, spend an hour or two at a busy freeway interchange and look up the UN numbers on the placarded trucks that go by.

Do my comments mean that everything is hunky-dory? Certainly not. There are many posts on these forums that indicate that things could be better. But things aren't as bad as the picture you painted.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

We are all familiar with the first sentence in the Book of Operating Rules, so I won't repeat it here. That being said, corner-cutting on safety is not strictly a management sin, although if management doesn't stress adherence to the rules, labor is going to be more willing to cut corners since it's tolerated at the higher levels.

It's interesting to note that, based on postings on other threads, there are complaints about management nitpicking when first-level supervisors insist on obedience to the rules (all of them). The rules are there for a reason. Compliance with the rules, whether management insists on it or not, will increase the likelihood that you will make it to the end of the day alive and intact.

[jchnhtfd]

I asked a friend of mine, an airline pilot, once if he flew differently when he had a fully loaded plane vs. when he had an empty plane. His reply (edited for publication) was: 'heck no. I'm going to get to the crash first, no matter how many people are on board, and I don't want to get there!'. The point? The operating guys in the air -- and, in this context, on the ground and running the engines -- are going to take as much care as they can, and be as safe as they can. As Larry noted, bad things happen. And rules get bent. But it seems to me that the safety culture is very much alive and pretty healthy, on the whole -- at least from what I've seen around.

Larry's point about visibility is the key: the news only reports the unusual. You wreck a train (even put a couple of cars on the ground) and it's news, big time. You wreck an 18 wheeler and tie up a major highway for 4 hours, and it's 'so what else is new?' and the paper runs an article on a stray wallaby instead (really -- an example from today in my area). And good news is not news, my friends...

[Anonymous]

Jim-

I know you have written manuscripts on most railroads out there, but have you ever actually worked in any capacity for a railroad?

From your comments I can tell that you have been reading WAY too much propaganda about remotes. Also, your post contains a HUGE amount of speculation based upon a relatively small number of incidents.

Nobody wants to be safe more than I do, but I'm concerned that all the hoopla about safety will have a very negative effect on my work environment.

LC

[k9wrangler]

QUOTE: Originally posted by tree68


And if you want a real scare about what's being carried around in this country, spend an hour or two at a busy freeway interchange and look up the UN numbers on the placarded trucks that go by.

Not to mention no placards required on trucks carrying less than 500 lb. of hazardous material.[:0]

[Anonymous]

i stumbled upon this as i am reading a story in the florida times union front page "stories target csx crossing crash reports" apparently csx is in some hot water for not reporting grade crossing fatalaties to the federal government..im not quit sure how this ties in at any other point than safety but i thought someone may find it interesting

[route_rock]

Actually there are some haz mats that need not be placarded if up to 1,000 lbs.Then there are others that even if you have a drop of it you better have every placacard on.Look at the Dangerous placard thats a witchs brew inside said trailer.Remotes are ok but there has been a lot of bad press yes.Had a remote take a guy out in San Antonio back in Jan I believe.He screwed up ran himself over from what news said.Thing is on most Class I and II's good luck getting a loco out without some one spotting you.In CTC territory a dispatcher would see a UA movement and switch you at the safest place.Granted you may have dumped a train but it would be better to dump a stolen train away from a city than have the perps get away with it.One point you made has me wondering.Track being so horrible where?Me thinks you have been suckered or are trying to sucker some of us.Anyhoo stay safe stay alert too.

[Richard A]

I think we are all hurting a bit by the current attention the railroad industry, especially Class I's, is getting today. Deep down, we know that even considering the vagaries of media reporting (sharks drawn to blood), there is always something that can be done to improve safety and performance. I do not mean to be an apologist or blind supporter of the railroad industry, love it though I may, but give a machine like the New York Times or 20/20 or any big investigative group access to ANY industry and they will find dirt.

Try the meat packing industry, any major league sport, the automotive industry, or any major food handler. Take a good look at the kitchen in any fast food restaurant. There will always be something serious to uncover, big or small. The common denominator among all these industries is -- people. The larger the industry (and number of employees) and the closer the interface is to the general public, the higher the potential for scandal.

I just hope the railroad industry uses this opportunity to "anneal" itself and clean up whatever needs to be cleaned up.

The mass media learning to clean up its act is less likely, I fear, because guess who buys their output?

[BaltACD]

QUOTE: Originally posted by RollonDowntheLine

i stumbled upon this as i am reading a story in the florida times union front page "stories target csx crossing crash reports" apparently csx is in some hot water for not reporting grade crossing fatalaties to the federal government..im not quit sure how this ties in at any other point than safety but i thought someone may find it interesting

The easiest attack the Government can mount against anybody, individual or corportate is the 'failure to report'. The buracracy of the corporations and the multiplicity of reporting requirements and the number of exceptions rival the tax code in their complexity. The Governments as we all know has more than enough problems handling data that is reported correctly and then loosing the report. Failure to report then gets couched in the terminology that the 'reporter' is trying to hide something through the failure to report. I've got two words for such bunk.

BOVINE ***!