From the TRAINS Newswire Digest of this date: The following, in part: FTA "... The regulation proposed earlier this week would require two people in the cab of a train’s lead locomotive, with exceptions for switching, brake tests, safety inspections, and setouts. In an announcement of the proposal, Gov. Laura Kelly, a Democrat, said, ““Kansas has faced issues ranging from crew member fatigue to derailments which pose a threat to our safety and security – but by maintaining the current practice of requiring a two-person crew we can ensure the health and safety of Kansas workers.” The Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Union Transportation Division (SMART-TD) said the proposal follows more than a decade of work by its Kansas state legislative director, Ty Dragoo, who called its introduction “the proudest day of my career.” If the regulation is approved, Kansas would become at least the eighth state with a two-person crew requirement. .."
Not exactly sure, how this will 'shake out' ? Seems like a jab to the Short-line railroad folks; WATCO of Pittsburg being a Kansas Company. They may have some input?
Seems like a possible case of political dues-paying? Our 'ole' school marm govenor has got until the end of 2021 before the next election, and she's already stated she was not running again...
Unless it's federal rule, it won't stick. Kansas has a good number of other regulations that are unenforceable.
Kansas would do better to clean house and actually fix some of their prior blunders than pile on more junk.
SMART and BLET have been working with legislators in many states to enact these two man crew requirements. Meanwhile, FRA has said regulations requiring two man crews aren't necessary and FRA regs pre-empt any attempt by individual states to impose two man crew requirements.
I suspect the goal here is to get enough of these state requirements enacted that the issue finally ends up in the Federal courts.
Juniata ManSMART and BLET have been working with legislators in many states to enact these two man crew requirements. Meanwhile, FRA has said regulations requiring two man crews aren't necessary and FRA regs pre-empt any attempt by individual states to impose two man crew requirements. I suspect the goal here is to get enough of these state requirements enacted that the issue finally ends up in the Federal courts.
Think back to Indiana and various other states that implemented train staffing requirements for trains operating in their state.
Indiana had a law requiring a 3rd Brakeman for trains with more than 69 cars, operating in the state. That law was in effect and being complied with when I hired out in 1965 in Washington, IN and remained in effect after I departed Indiana in mid 1967. I don't know when that law was modified or removed to get to the point of having the two man crews that exist today.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
People elect the democracy they deserve, and if that comes to be influenced by unions with incompetent counsel, they deserve that too unless they organize to eliminate it.
I commented to the Office of the Governor this morning pointing out how broadly their proposed legislation would be real-world inapplicable, and a waste of state resources to attempt to enforce. So they have had their Talmudic warning if they choose to proceed.
I also suggested that the way to proceed, if the issue is as important to them as they claim, is to have their representatives in the present activist House build consensus there for expedient Federal legislation either to mandate crews as provided in K.A.R. [36-43-1] or to work toward some "safety" based regulation via a putatively Biden-directed FRA if the election goes that way.
I don't think two-man crews are even a footnote as a priority to the DNC or Biden.
This was discussed in a thread awhile ago. It appeared Indiana abolished it in the summer of 1972 although a few brakemen were grandfather in, not sure how that worked. The ICC had something to do with it as it ruled that the RR's could charge an extra fee for any freight originating in Indiana to help pay for the cost of a 3rd brakeman. That got the Indiana shippers to place pressure on the legislators and the repeal then occurred.
charlie hebdoI don't think two-man crews are even a footnote as a priority to the DNC or Biden
The changes in the '70s reflected the precedent that the number of crew did not translate directly into safety -- the only presumptive ground for Federal interstate regulation. I doubt all the Brandeis-brief efforts to re-establish the idea will add anything new to make that precedent change.
Juniata Man SMART and BLET have been working with legislators in many states to enact these two man crew requirements. Meanwhile, FRA has said regulations requiring two man crews aren't necessary and FRA regs pre-empt any attempt by individual states to impose two man crew requirements. I suspect the goal here is to get enough of these state requirements enacted that the issue finally ends up in the Federal courts.
Probably anticipating that there may be changes in attitudes at the DOT and FRA next year. That even if the proposed requirement isn't revisited at the national level, there will be an easing of Federal pre-emption.
Jeff
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.