Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
BNSF Roadmaster Killed & Cell Phone Distraction
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p>[quote user="edblysard"]</p> <p>But I use my Motorola constantly when riding a shove, walking across tracks, giving instructions to my engineer or switchman, talking to the yardmaster or trainmaster, all while in motion and around live track, up to and including walking between tracks, where one or both tracks are moving.</p> <p>I have in fact, used my cell phone in lieu of my radio when the locomotive radio failed, we completed the movement via cell phone communication.</p> <p>Not picking a fight, but both are handheld communication devices, both require you to use one hand to work them, both require you to devote some of your attention to the device and its use.</p> <p>About the only real difference I can come up with is that when using a radio, most of us follow and use standard radio communication skills, with the almost universal radio language, where as with a cell phone, most folks simply carry on a conversation...but if you used the normal radio communication language on a cell phone, why would it be any different, especially if you used a blue tooth device that did not require you to press a button, or even handle the device?</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div> <p>[/quote]</p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I understand what you are saying. There are several things to consider here.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I know you routinely use the radio at work, and I am not really clear on what is allowed and not allowed regarding cell phones.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I am only banning their use when crossing a track on the BNSF, based on the rule cited in the BNSF report you posted.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I am assuming that that is a rule, and not just a memo or something.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I do not know whether it was written intending it to apply to cell phones by its reference to “tools that impair hearing.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, I cannot possibly see how the words would not apply to a cell phone or a radio.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Both are tools, and both impair hearing. So I am focused on the impairment of hearing that communication devices can cause. </span></span></p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">To be more precise, they don’t actually impair hearing at the level where the sense of hearing is activated and registered with the brain.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Everything that enters the ears gets heard.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It would be more accurate to say the devices add sounds that could interrupt or jam what is being heard otherwise.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is also true that an airplane could interrupt what is being heard otherwise, but to the wording of the rule, an airplane is not a tool that can be carried while crossing a track.</span></span></p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"></span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">A cell phone could directly impair hearing by interrupting hearing by the sound it adds to what is being heard otherwise, or it could cause distraction that takes a person’s mind off of what is being heard.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But in either case, the rules require an employee to know that it is clear to foul a track, and therefore the prudent thing to do would be to look for trains as well as listen for them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So, from a practical standpoint, something that interferes with hearing would not necessarily pose a practical danger to a person crossing a track.</span></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"></span></span></span><span style="font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">But this all boils down to a very practical issue with this BNSF accident in Minnesota.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The victim was talking on a cell phone as he stepped in front of the train, and the train sounded a rapid succession of horn toots as it approached the victim.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Since the victim did not heed the engineer’s warning, I must conclude that he did not hear it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And he was carrying a tool that can impair hearing while he crossed the track on which authority or protection had not been provided.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></span></p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy