[The subject line is the NEWSWire topic in today's newswire.]
As a vet and railfan; I found this one to be a potential game changer in todays railroad world.
The subject was hired and working as a full employee of UPRR in NLR Ar. Was also a member of the Army(Ark) National Guard. Leaves active UPR employment to go on a deployment for 5 years. While on deployment he suffers 'injuries' culmanating in his diagnosis of PTSD and also a'brain injury'(?) and his medical discharge.
Returns to work at UPR where he is re-hired, and works without any 'special work needs,requests'(?).
At some point he is promoted from conductor to engineer. and then suffers 'issues' around his PTSD disgnosis/ military diagnoses(?). A Therepist recomends that he get a 'service dog' to help him cope with the issues around his service injuries. That is, apparently, the point at which , the UPR 'denied his request' to have his service dog at work (?)
So then the employee has no other route than to file a lawsuit, under The Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
Amore detailed account is in the TRAINS NEWSWire, and the linked article from The Arkansas Gazette article. Looks like one of thiose things that whatever way it is decided in Court; it will potentially, have wide ramifications.
Regards - Steve
They refer mostly to the same usage. Service dogs are trained to assist folks with a diagnosed disability. Therapy dogs are a subset used for people with a diagnosed mental health condition in which a companion dog reduces anxiety.
steve-in-kvilleMaybe this varies from state to state, but a service dog can go about anywhere, but the other can be asked to leave? Could be wrong there. BTW- I can't find the link to this article.
In some states anyone can get a pet named as a "companion". Allows you to have a pet in otherwise non-pet places. It is heavily abused and that's why various states are cracking down on it.
alphasIt is heavily abused and that's why various states are cracking down on it.
Yeah, the therapy chickens, iguanas, et. al. raised a few eyebrows.
Obviously some folks here are fans of the politics of resentment.
charlie hebdo Obviously some folks here are fans of the politics of resentment.
Not at all. What alphas said and what I concur with is in too many cases it seems to be the nature of some to abuse a priviledge when that priviledge is extended.
And as far as I know the admission of service and therapy dogs to business establishments is a priviledge, not a right. Most places extend the priviledge gladly because it's the right thing to do and it's good for business as well.
By the way, I'm all in favor of that UP engineer having his therapy dog on board. Why not? Animals as "train crew" used to be an old railroad tradition. Dogs, cats, parrots, ducks, and bunny rabbits used to be quite common as pets of the train crews.
https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/sep/07/dog-at-work-suit-heads-to-trial/?latest
Fear of unknown possible ramifications of allowing an animal on a train by UP may be the reason for denying request. But I expect they will loose this case. Typical management fear of change and setting precients.
We talk a lot here about vetting potential crew members. Would this fellow pass the initial vetting as a new hire?
I understand the PTSD thing and sympathize with it. But at some point we need to ask if we want someone whose condition calls for a service/support animal at the controls of a 15,000 foot train of crude oil...
Harsh, I know.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Dogs go to the vet all the time...it shouldn't be a problem!
Under ADA he is allowd to have a therapy dog with him at work/ He will win his case aaginst UP.
What happens if the other person in the cab has a severe dog allergy? Serious question as I know people with dog allergies.
With respect to service versus therapy dogs, service dogs typically get a lot more training than therapy dogs and this are allowed in places where therapy dogs can be excluded.
caldreamerUnder ADA he is allowd to have a therapy dog with him at work/ He will win his case aaginst UP.
Not sure the ADA applies here. Railroads have their own federal regulatory regime, and and it could be that FRA regulations (however they might pertain to this situation) would supercede the ADA (I am no lawyer and do not know for sure one way or the other). ADA has been around for some 30 years and the RRs have not had to make locomtive cabs accessible to wheel chairs yet.
tree68We talk a lot here about vetting potential crew members. Would this fellow pass the initial vetting as a new hire? I understand the PTSD thing and sympathize with it. But at some point we need to ask if we want someone whose condition calls for a service/support animal at the controls of a 15,000 foot train of crude oil... Harsh, I know.
How is it that he worked as a Conductor without need for the therapy animal. but now that he is an engineer he needs the animal.
Why aren't effective treatments being developed for PTSD, rather changing all the surroundings around a individual with PTSD.
PTSD individuals need treatment and therapy to allow them to function in society as it exists rather than to change everything in society.
VA personnel heed to be enhanced with more therapists with more training and more funding to assist the multitude of servicemen whose service placed them in the positions that generate PTSD. Private helthcare plans need to cover PTSD, not just brush it aside as most do these days.
Healthcare needs to be all about HEALTH, not about profit.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDHow is it that he worked as a Conductor without need for the therapy animal. but now that he is an engineer he needs the animal.
There is a lot more mental stress on that side of the cab. And that's not even factoring in all the PSR-EHH BS that is in play.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
zugmann BaltACD How is it that he worked as a Conductor without need for the therapy animal. but now that he is an engineer he needs the animal. There is a lot more mental stress on that side of the cab. And that's not even factoring in all the PSR-EHH BS that is in play.
BaltACD How is it that he worked as a Conductor without need for the therapy animal. but now that he is an engineer he needs the animal.
If you can't emotionally handle the stress of 'promotion' to the other side of the engine it is time to look for another form of work - within or without your present employer.
Personally, I don't see how a 'support animal' will assist the person to make correct decisions at the proper times in the operation of a locomotive and the train which it will be hauling.
I suspect this situation has been created by the 'mandatory promotion' provisions that were written into the contracts that apply to Conductors in the 1990's and 21st Century.
The organization that must respond has to make a case for 'bonafide operational requirement.' For service personnel in the Canadian military, the bottom line when such rulings go before the courts is whether the person can be placed as a sentry to guard a military or government establishment without food, drink, or other eventually necessaries (yes, that's a legal and correct term...necessaries), including medications, for extended periods in all kinds of weather. Think if a Type 1 diabetic who requires at the very least a replenishment of insulin if he/she has a pump, or who needs regular injections, or recourse to meals. This may not be practicable or even possible during an insurrection or other emergency where the person's terms of service and job description require them to proceed as directed and to stand guard for many hours, without relief.
Similarly, what restriction on an engineer's stated duties and terms of employment are there when a dog is permitted in the cab? What unacceptable liabilities will underwriters have to accept, or the public, or the employer if the dog is deemed essential by judgement, and that such requirements are deemed to be reasonable and enforceable?
If one develops a condition that precludes that bottom line of standing guard at a gate, or along a fenceline, for hours without rest or reprieve, Canadian service personnel's cases go before a medical board. They are almost universally designated as unsuitable for service in any capacity, at which they are released from their current terms of service. This is supported on the basis of 'equity in service' where all service personnel are required to be able to serve at least in this very limited, but essential, capacity, other restrictions, limitations (including medical), and other impediments of a more temporary or lesser degree notwithstanding.
So, UPRR will have to generate a convincing a robust argument that having even a well-trained and highly necessary animal in the cab of an operating engineer is going to be a detriment, perhaps even a danger, to the engineer, his crew, and/or to the public.
Will the animal climb cab steps on its own? That first step is a big one from ground level, or from ground level at the edge of the ballast.
Around here we have several drivers that carry dogs with them as travel companions. We require documention of their current shots a deposit for any damage that is refunded if the truck is clean after they switch or leave the carrier. These dogs all can make the leap from the ground into the cab of any of our trucks from ground level with out a problem. We have several beagles a couple labs 1 German Shepard and a few other breeds or mixed dogs in the fleet. Our drivers know that at the shippers and receivers that the dog stays in the cab unless the customer gives the okay for them to be outside. We also require they clean up after their dogs in terms of waste. It can be done as 2 of these dogs are Service animals for PTSD of their owners that are Iraq war vets. One is a Beagle the other is a Toy poodle crossed with a Daushound. Those 2 dogs literally can have a steak put in front of them and NOT eat it unless told they can.
selector They are almost universally designated as unsuitable for service in any capacity, at which they are released from their current terms of service.
In the Marines we used the term "non-deployable," which is really a way of saying they're unsuitable for a combat role. An exception can be made (and usually is) for staff NCOs or officers posessing an invaluable skill, in which case they're classified as "Limited Duty" and allowed to stay on until they reach enough time in service to qualify for retirement.
I believe all the other services have the same policy.
BaltACD zugmann BaltACD How is it that he worked as a Conductor without need for the therapy animal. but now that he is an engineer he needs the animal. There is a lot more mental stress on that side of the cab. And that's not even factoring in all the PSR-EHH BS that is in play. If you can't emotionally handle the stress of 'promotion' to the other side of the engine it is time to look for another form of work - within or without your present employer. Personally, I don't see how a 'support animal' will assist the person to make correct decisions at the proper times in the operation of a locomotive and the train which it will be hauling. I suspect this situation has been created by the 'mandatory promotion' provisions that were written into the contracts that apply to Conductors in the 1990's and 21st Century.
Given the difference of opinions, i'd defer to that of an actual engineer like zugmann.
caldreamer Under ADA he is allowd to have a therapy dog with him at work/ He will win his case aaginst UP.
Doesn't the ADA use the wording "reasonable accomodation" for employment? It will be up to a judge to "reasonable" in the context of his current employment. Possibly employment in another job with the UP but at his engineer pay rate.
I'm not a lawyer and I only stayed at a Best Western last night.
Jeff
Will this dog qualify as a emotional support animal?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkcKdfL7G3A
selector The organization that must respond has to make a case for 'bonafide operational requirement.' For service personnel in the Canadian military, the bottom line when such rulings go before the courts is whether the person can be placed as a sentry to guard a military or government establishment without food, drink, or other eventually necessaries (yes, that's a legal and correct term...necessaries), including medications, for extended periods in all kinds of weather. Think if a Type 1 diabetic who requires at the very least a replenishment of insulin if he/she has a pump, or who needs regular injections, or recourse to meals. This may not be practicable or even possible during an insurrection or other emergency where the person's terms of service and job description require them to proceed as directed and to stand guard for many hours, without relief. Similarly, what restriction on an engineer's stated duties and terms of employment are there when a dog is permitted in the cab? What unacceptable liabilities will underwriters have to accept, or the public, or the employer if the dog is deemed essential by judgement, and that such requirements are deemed to be reasonable and enforceable? If one develops a condition that precludes that bottom line of standing guard at a gate, or along a fenceline, for hours without rest or reprieve, Canadian service personnel's cases go before a medical board. They are almost universally designated as unsuitable for service in any capacity, at which they are released from their current terms of service. This is supported on the basis of 'equity in service' where all service personnel are required to be able to serve at least in this very limited, but essential, capacity, other restrictions, limitations (including medical), and other impediments of a more temporary or lesser degree notwithstanding. "So, UPRR will have to generate a convincing a robust argument that having even a well-trained and highly necessary animal in the cab of an operating engineer is going to be a detriment, perhaps even a danger, to the engineer, his crew, and/or to the public."
"So, UPRR will have to generate a convincing a robust argument that having even a well-trained and highly necessary animal in the cab of an operating engineer is going to be a detriment, perhaps even a danger, to the engineer, his crew, and/or to the public."
selector's argument and those of BaltACD [ :re; the VA, etc. ] are in the area's that I had concerns with. As a vet with a VA rating I am fascinated with the problems contained in this story about the UPRR engineer and his issues with employment in an industry that one does not usually see the issues surrounding his medical 'issues' everyday.
To the problems with definitions: the arguments are definitely specific to the terms 'SERVICE Animal and THERAPY animal.
The Service dog is a 'Trained animal' its duties are specific to the individual. Normally, a trained [trained in conjunction with its vet/handler] the service dog is assigned for one or two specific duties. [Such a trained dog carries 'papers' to show its certification and training] A couple of those duties might require the animal to fetch a dropped item for its owner; open a door, or even assist the peron in a street crossing type situation.
The Therapy dog/animal(?) is essentially, not normally, formally trained. It is simply a companion; mostly, they are there to 'calm' its person who can be 'unstable' (physically or mentally) in 'stressful' situations (?).
The Therapy animal definition is somewhat problematic (?) Hence; one may have seen stories written of Therapy animales that ran the range and scope of types from gerbils to dogs to large fowl, (?) The A.D.A. definitions/regulatiions are apparently open to 'interpretations(?)'. Which is where many of the problems arise when the public is presented with such creatures. There are no specific papers issued for therapy animals; except ,maybe, by the patients Therapist ior possibly another clinition on the case(?).
As a regular volunteer at our local VA Hospital, I have seen some strange Therapy animals, and some very well-trained service dogs, in my duties there.
BaltACD's question about Service Dogs in the cabs of locomotives, asks several solid questions in regards to a service dog in the cab; and its interactions in that environment.
Enforcement of the provisions of the A.D.A. seem to have been all over the spectrum. I have no idea how the outcome of one will come out. An obvious solution seems to be a job transfer the individual and his service dog to some other duties on the railroad. Will be interesting to find out its outcome.
From the article:
But Union Pacific denied the request, saying it was unclear how a dog would react to dangerous conditions at the rail yard such as moving cars and locomotives; that there was no infrastructure to support a dog on a train or on overnight trips that Hopman's conductor job sometimes required; and that the dog could pose a risk to other employees. At the time, Atlas hadn't completed his 18-month service dog training. But after the training was completed in April 2017, Hopman again sought permission to bring Atlas to work with him. This time, he cited the dog's training that was designed, among other things, to keep him focused on his service duties in varied environments, and even to go without a potty break for 14 hours, if necessary.
But Union Pacific denied the request, saying it was unclear how a dog would react to dangerous conditions at the rail yard such as moving cars and locomotives; that there was no infrastructure to support a dog on a train or on overnight trips that Hopman's conductor job sometimes required; and that the dog could pose a risk to other employees.
At the time, Atlas hadn't completed his 18-month service dog training. But after the training was completed in April 2017, Hopman again sought permission to bring Atlas to work with him. This time, he cited the dog's training that was designed, among other things, to keep him focused on his service duties in varied environments, and even to go without a potty break for 14 hours, if necessary.
I think Jeff's comments about being offered a non road job at the same pay will be the result.
rdamonI think Jeff's comments about being offered a non road job at the same pay will be the result.
How does that work when someone is hired as an agreement employee with seniority, though?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.