Tag: fatigue

Home>News>fatigue

While sleep scientists have established that going to work fatigued is like going to work drunk, there remains a disconnect among those who manage transportation firms. And people are needlessly dying and being seriously injured as a result.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood June 1 criticized his own Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration for not sooner putting a North Carolina bus operator — allegedly with a history of safety problems, including forcing drivers to work without sufficient rest — out of business sooner.

When the FMCSA finally got around to taking that shutdown action against the bus company May 31, four more lives were lost and 54 more passengers were injured.

The cause of that rollover bus accident near Richmond, Va., May 27 was driver fatigue, according to Virginia State Police, who jailed the bus operator for reckless driving. Seven times since October 2009, the bus company — Sky Express of Charlotte, N.C. — had been cited by the FMCSA for violating federal hours-of-service regulations requiring adequate rest for drivers, according to USA Today.

“I’m extremely disappointed that this carrier was allowed to continue operating unsafely when it should have been placed out of service,” LaHood told USA Today.

Sky Express received an “unsatisfactory” safety rating in April from the FMCSA, according to USA Today, but the FMCSA extended its investigation to, according to an FMCSA spokesperson, “make sure we had an airtight case to shut the company down.”

LaHood told USA Today, “There is no excuse for delay when a bus operator should be put out of service for safety’s sake. On my watch, there will never be another extension granted to a carrier we believe is unsafe.”

The FMCSA said Sky Express had numerous violations for keeping fatigued drivers behind the wheel and failing to ensure its drivers were properly licensed, had proper medical certificates, and could read road signs in English.

The National Transportation Safety Board blamed driver fatigue for a 2008 bus crash in Utah that killed nine, and a 2004 crash in Arkansas that killed 14. A fatal bus crash near New York City March 12, which killed 15, is under investigation. The company operating the bus was cited five times in fewer than two years for allowing fatigued drivers behind the wheel.

UTU members should note that federal law protects aviation, bus and rail workers from retaliation and threats of retaliation when they report that a carrier violated federal hours-of-service regulations.

Whistle-blower complaints may be filed directly with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), or you may contact a UTU designated legal counsel, your general chairperson or your state legislative director for assistance.

To view a more detailed OSHA fact sheet on whistle-blower protection, click on the following link:

www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA-factsheet-whistleblower-railroad.pdf

Calvin Studivant

By Calvin Studivant
Alternate vice president, Bus Department

Fatigue management was a topic of significant importance earlier this month at a National Transportation Safety Board forum I attended in Washington, D.C.

The troubling news from the forum is that non-union bus operators, employed by so-called low-cost carriers, are being forced to work too many hours, with many of the drivers clearly in violation of hours-of-service regulations.

For too many non-union bus operators, pay is so low they are compromised into working excessive hours to feed their families — and that means driving while fatigued. That’s not only unlawful; it’s dangerous.

Medical experts who study fatigue have concluded that going to work fatigued is like going to work drunk.

An effective solution is not necessarily revising the hours-of-service regulations; but rather revising the law that permits non-union carriers to avoid paying their drivers overtime rates.

At no time should low driver earnings be allowed to compromise safety, but that is the situation too many low-paid, non-union operators face.

Lack of training is another problem for non-union operators employed by carriers whose primary interest is putting a driver — no matter how poorly paid or poorly trained — behind the wheel.

Much emphasis is being placed on revising hours-of-service regulations and installing new technology such as collision warning systems and lane departure warnings. Yes, they are important in assuring safety.

Too often overlooked is the ability of carriers to intimidate drivers into violating the hours-of-service law; and the fact that new technology is not, in itself, a solution to the fatigue problem.

In my mind, it makes eminent good sense to put equal or more emphasis on assuring only qualified, alert and non-fatigued drivers are behind the wheel — drivers who are properly trained and properly recruited with competitive wage and benefits packages.

Within the UTU, we recognize this in our contracts, and it is time for federal and state regulators to recognize the issue among the growing number of so-called low-cost bus companies that put profit ahead of safety.

Take, for example, a bill currently being considered by the U.S. Senate — S. 453, the Motorcoach Enhanced Safety Act. The bill would require safety improvements in construction of new buses, but missing in that bill is recognition that assuring the hiring and retention of properly qualified, fully trained and competitively paid drivers is equally important in assuring safe passenger transportation.

I will be leading discussions on these issues at our regional meetings in San Antonio and New York in June and July, and I hope as many of our drivers as possible will attend these regional meeting bus workshops.

We also will be discussing the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s new rules for obtaining a commercial driver’s license (CDL) and commerical learner’s permit (CLP). Those new rules are posted on the UTU webpage.

In the San Antonio and New York regional meetings we also will be discussing opportunities for federal grants to help improve the skills of labor negotiators and encourage innovative approaches to collaborative labor-management problem solving. We will work with the UTU National Legislative Office and President Futhey to make application for a grant to the UTU.

I also call your attention to the Bus Department page of the UTU website at www.utu.org. A link has been added on that page to a recent DOT Motorcoach Safety Action Plan. Scroll down on that page and the link is in the fourth column to the right, under “Bus Safety”. The new FMCSA rules on obtaining a CDL and CLP also appear there.

WASHINGTON — The single most important action Congress and the Federal Railroad Administration can take to improve rail safety — especially in the movement of hazardous materials — is to eliminate train-crew fatigue and provide predictable start times for train crews.

That was the message delivered April 7 to the House Railroad Subcommittee by UTU National Legislative Director James Stem. The subcommittee met to learn more about rail hazmat safety.

“The unpredictable work schedules of safety critical operating employees in the railroad industry has and continues to be the root cause of the fatigue problems that have placed many releases of hazardous materials on the front pages of our newspapers,” Stem told the subcommittee.

Although the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA) provides for 10 hours of undisturbed rest between work assignments, “the application is misplaced because it does nothing to improve the predictability of reporting times nor does it allow employees the opportunity to plan their rest before reporting for duty,” Stem said.

“One small improvement that will make a tremendous difference in the safety for all train operations is simply to move the required 10 hours of undisturbed rest from immediately following service to immediately preceding service,” Stem said.

“The minimum of 10 hours of notification before reporting for 12 hours or more of safety critical service will allow operating employees to get their proper rest prior to reporting for duty so they can safety and alertly operate their train while on duty.

“An even greater safety enhancement would be to assign regular start times for each crew, or at a minimum require that crews be notified before going off duty of the time they must report back for service,” he said.

Stem told the subcommittee that many railroads “have worked hard since RSIA was passed to develop new software programs to enable their operations to deny the required rest days for employees. Many employees are required to observe their only day off while laying over in a one-star hotel at the away from home terminal.

“The itemized six-and-two and seven-and-three work-rest schedules in the RSIA remain a dream for 95 percent of our freight operating employees,” Stem said.

The UTU’s national legislative director also stressed a need for more frequent track inspections. “Timely track inspections by qualified track inspectors should be conducted with a frequency directly proportional to the amount of traffic passing over a track segment,” Stem told the subcommittee.

Stem provided the subcommittee, on behalf of the UTU and its members, a list of 24 specific recommendations to reduce crew fatigue:

  1. Railroad employees covered by the hours of service law shall be provided a predictable and defined work/rest period.
  2. A 10-hour call for all unassigned road service. This provision would require the 10 hours of undisturbed rest be provided immediately prior to performing covered service instead of immediately following service.
  3. All yard service assignments with defined start times will be covered by the same provisions that now apply to passenger and commuter rail.
  4. All yardmaster assignments will be HOS-covered service under the freight employees’ rule.
  5. The FRA shall issue regulations within 12 months to require all deadhead transportation in excess of a certain number of hours to be counted as time on duty and a job start.
  6. No amount of time off-duty at the away from home terminal will reset the calendar clock of job starts, and the employee shall not be required to take mandatory rest days at the away from home terminal.
  7. 24 hours off duty at the home terminal which does not include a full calendar day will reset the calendar clock.
  8. Interim release periods require notification to the crew before going off duty. If the crew is not notified, the 10 hours uninterrupted rest will prohibit changing the service to include an interim release.
  9. There shall be a two-hour limit on limbo time per each tour of duty.
  10. There shall be assigned a minimum of 24 hours off duty at the designated home terminal in each seven-day period during which time the employee shall be unavailable for any service for the railroad. The off-duty period shall encompass a minimum of one full calendar day and the employee shall be notified not less than seven calendar days prior to the assigned off duty period.
  11. A railroad shall provide hot nutritious food 24 hours a day at the sleeping quarters when the crew is at the designated away from home terminal, and at an interim release location. If such food is not provided on a railroad’s premises, a restaurant that provides such food shall not be located more than five minutes normal walking distance from the employee’s sleeping quarters or other rest facility. Fast food establishments shall not satisfy the requirements of this subsection.
  12. A railroad shall be prohibited from providing sleeping quarters in areas where switching or humping operations are performed.
  13. Not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of this act, the FRA shall promulgate a regulation requiring whistle-board signs allocated at least 1/4 mile in advance of public highway-rail grade crossings. Provided, however, such regulation shall not apply to such crossings that are subject to a whistle ban.
  14. Under the railroad whistle-blower law, the secretary of labor shall have subpoena power to require the production of documents and/or the attendance of witnesses to give testimony.
  15. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, regulation or order, whenever Congress enacts legislation mandating that the FRA promulgate a railroad safety regulation, there shall be no requirement for a cost/benefit analysis by the FRA.
  16. During an accident/incident investigation process, upon request, a railroad shall produce event recorder information to law enforcement personnel and to the designated employee representative(s) defined under the Railway Labor Act.
  17. In an engineer or conductor decertification proceeding, if the FRA issues a final order in favor of an employee, a railroad shall be prohibited from subsequently attempting to discipline such employee for any alleged acts which may have arisen from the incident involved in the decertification proceeding.
  18. In an engineer or conductor certification or decertification proceeding the FRA shall have the authority to require the retesting of the employee, to order the employee’s reinstatement with the same seniority status the employee would be entitled to but for decertification or refusal of certification, and to grant any other or further relief that the FRA deems appropriate.
  19. All federal railroad safety laws and regulations shall be subject only to the preemption requirements set forth in the Federal Railroad Safety Act.
  20. A railroad owned or operated by a state or other governmental entity shall, as a condition of being a recipient of federal funds, agree immediately thereafter the receipt of such funds to waive any defense of sovereign immunity in a cause of action for damages brought against such railroad alleging a violation of a federal railroad safety law or regulation pursuant to title 28, 45, or 49, United States Code.
  21. No state law or regulation covering walkways for railroad employees shall be preempted or precluded until such time as the FRA promulgates a regulation which substantially subsumes the subject matter.
  22. In any claim alleging a violation of a federal railroad safety law, a settlement of such claim cannot release a cause of action, injury or death which did not exist at the time of settlement of such claim.
  23. An employee of the NTSB or the FRA who previously worked as a railroad employee has the right to return to railroad employment with all seniority retained.
  24. Amtrak shall not be liable for damages or liability, in a claim arising out of an accident or incident unless the said Corporation is negligent in causing the accident or incident.

If a congressionally ordered railroad risk reduction program is to be effective, the Federal Railroad Administration must include railroad employees and their labor unions in the process of evaluating and managing the program.

That is the message seven rail labor organizations sent to the FRA Feb. 8 in response to an earlier FRA notice of proposed rulemaking implementing a risk reduction program.

The program was ordered by Congress in the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA). Its purpose is to reduce the consequences and rates of railroad accidents, incidents, injuries and fatalities.

The UTU was joined by the American Train Dispatchers Association, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes, Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen, Brotherhood of Railway Carmen and Transport Workers Union in commenting to the FRA.

Congress specifically concluded that having railroads “unilaterally decide issues of safety would not be in the public interest,” the UTU and the other labor organizations told the FRA. Yet, the notice of proposed rulemaking “undermines” that congressional intent.

To ensure an effective risk reduction program, the FRA must solicit rail labor input and participation, said the labor organizations. Specific to train and engine workers, such participation must include:

  • Technology implementation.
  • Fatigue management.
  • Risks posed by joint operations, including passenger and commuter trains.
  • Security risks.
  • National Transportation Safety Board recommendations.
  • Disclosure of all carrier bonus, incentive and compensation systems that reward management employees for meeting or exceeding safety related goals, targets, benchmarks or milestones.
  • Disclosure of policies and data related to waiver and discipline practices that in any way discourage accurate reporting of accidents, incidents, injuries or close calls.

The labor organizations also asked the FRA to develop historical data on the following:

  • Number of disciplinary charges filed for rule violations.
  • Number of whistle-blower cases filed by employees.
  • Number of employee dismissals.
  • Number of FRA reportable injuries.
  • Number of meet and confer sessions related to safety.
  • Safety records of regional and shortline railroads.
  • Retaliation, intimidation and overall culture, attitude and policy toward safety reporting by employees.
  • Safety incentive programs and policies that create peer pressure within work groups not to report injuries in order to preserve incentive prizes.
  • A carrier’s past response to risk, hazards, defects, near misses and safety complaints reported by employees.
  • The effectiveness of operating rules and practices in risk reduction.
  • The effectiveness of safety and training programs.

Additionally, the labor organizations asked the FRA to “pay particular attention to railroads that regularly intimidate employees to cut corners [and] hold formal hearings and discipline employees whenever accidents or injuries are reported.”

The process for evaluating and managing a risk reduction program must also include direct employee input, said the labor organizations. “There is no substitute for interviewing employees actually doing the work,” and such interviews should mask the identity of employees to ensure “they may speak freely.”

Of special importance to train and engine workers is the implementation of a fatigue management plan. “A human being cannot possibly be rested to work safely unless that human being knows when they must report for service,” said the labor organizations. “Often, safety critical employees are forced to report for service even when fatigued, or [they] face disciplinary hearings and loss of employment.

“We encourage the FRA to take immediate action to require 10 hours of advance notification for all operating employees not otherwise on assignments with defined start times,” said the labor organizations.

To read the comments of the seven labor organizations, click here.

To read the FRA’s earlier notice of proposed rulemaking, click on the following link:

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-12-08/pdf/2010-30836.pdf

An educational website focusing on sleep, sleep disorders and fatigue management is being created in a collaborative effort among the UTU, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, the Federal Railroad Administration, sleep medicine experts at Harvard Medical School, and Boston Public Radio station WGBH, which is Public Broadcasting’s largest producer of education  web and television content.

Input from UTU rail members, nationwide, is essential to the project.

UTU members are encouraged to complete an anonymous, online survey that should take no more than 15 minutes.

To respond to the question and complete the survey, click on the following link:

www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22BBLHSEXZA

Additional information on the project and its website — Sleep Health for Railroaders — is available by clicking on the following link:

http://sleep.med.harvard.edu/ext/railroaders/

Train and engine workers are the eyes and ears of railroads — the first to spot trouble, and the first to suffer when trouble occurs.

On railroads, trouble too often means career-ending injuries and death.

The UTU Rail Safety Task Force was created by UTU International President Mike Futhey to develop strategies to reduce rail-employee risk while on the job. Members include Arizona State Legislative Director Greg Hynes, Arkansas State Legislative Director Steve Evans and Michigan State Legislative Director Jerry Gibson.

Earlier this year, the task force asked UTU members to share their workplace concerns. The member survey revealed overwhelmingly that fatigue, harassment and intimidation are distracting members from situational awareness and placing them in harm’s way.

The comments, below, have been culled from some 1,300 member responses. Some have been edited to correct grammar and spelling, and to remove names of railroads and individuals.

President Futhey will be sharing these member comments with carrier officials. The national legislative office will be sharing them with FRA officials.

Here is a sample of comments from UTU members:

We have an increased burden thinking of what will happen to our home and family because of harassment and constant operational testing. It affects everyone when a few easy targets are harassed.

The harassment has to stop. You cannot do your job without worrying about these officials.

An alarming number of workers are in fear of losing their jobs. Harassment is now the number-one concern in the discharge of duty.

The number-one problem is horrendous lineups. I would say if the carrier could get a handle on when they run trains, members could get properly rested to go work.

Intimidation is the prime motivator for these new young managers, who have zero clues as to how a conductor/trainman performs his or her tasks.

I have never seen any other companies harass and retaliate against employees like the railroad. They got the military beat.

Biggest safety issue? Bad lineups, bad lineups, bad lineups.

I always tell friends or strangers when asked about employment, to look elsewhere. I tell them about the working environment that is almost unbearable. The carrier is all about intimidation.

How can you work safely if you know they are watching you perform your work? That person is taking your mind off your job.

If you take too long to get out of the yard you have just put a target on your back and they will try to fire you.

I have never worked in industry with so much aggression, from management toward its employees.

Lineups are our biggest concern. Deadheads not being in the lineup before they are called causes many people to go to work without being rested.

The policy of the carrier is to intimidate, harass and assess capricious discipline on all its employees. We have gone from about three investigations last year at my location to over 20, just in the last three months.

The issue with rest isn’t time off; it is knowing when you are going to work.

The carrier uses testing to discipline and to dismiss, not for training.

Harassment is daily, and when you go to work you always wonder if you will make it through the day and have a job the next.

It’s bad when you’re out doing your job as safely as you can do it and wondering if a trainmaster or official is hiding behind the trees or bushes to try to catch you doing something wrong.

The carrier follows you around, hiding in the bushes, waiting for you to break a rule.

I can only figure when I’m going to work about 10 percent of the time.

Their safety program is based on nothing more than threats, harassment and intimidation.

Testing is so rampant that we’re afraid to look back around a curve for fear of missing a yellow board or other test.

If it takes too long to do a job safely the carrier will start to impose operational testing and follow employees around.

Managers frequently change their stories and make their stories fit the definition of a failure if they find out that the initial operations test failure in the field was not a valid failure under the written rule.

They interpret rules and assess failures based on their interpretation rather than what the rule states in black and white in the General Code of Operating Rules. This environment has caused a workplace that is less safe because of employees being more concerned about how rules will be interpreted.

The engine cab is our office, and they are never cleaned! This is basic; here is where it starts.

Efficiency tests in our terminal have increased, with an increasing number of petty failures.

Carrier intimidation creates animosity between crewmembers.

It affects everyone when a few easy targets are harassed.

They don’t care about our safety; it is all about the budget.

Many incidents, injuries and/or fatalities occur during the final portion of our duty hours. Taking into account fatigue issues, “running for the quit” is a common and dangerous practice.

Some carrier officers are very disrespectful.

It is pretty bad when you feel the need to look over your shoulder constantly.

They change jobs, starting times, crew sizes at will without regard to the men and women on the front lines. It would be nice to discuss upcoming changes rather than have them shoved down our throats without any input from the members who perform the service.

Many times I would be first out on the same extra board for more than 16 hours, and as soon as I try to get more rest the call comes in for a 12-hour run out of town. It’s a lineup for an accident.

Twelve hours off at the other end of my run is too long. I can only sleep four or five hours and then I stay awake, waiting for a call. By the time I go to work I am tired again.

When I am writing in my signal awareness form all the info the company wants, I am not looking up and around to see any unforeseen or possibly a event that could be prevented. We need more time looking instead of writing with head down, potentially missing or seeing late an important situation arising ahead of the train.

It appears carrier officials only want employees to comply with rules when they are watching/testing.

Rest is a problem on account of laying over 18 to 30 hours at away-from-home terminal. When you lay around a motel that long you are wore out.

Long lay-in times between shifts in through freight pools and extra lists is the number-one cause of fatigue in the rail industry and the carriers are increasing those times to break consecutive days worked.

The biggest safety issue in my opinion is the lack of training. There are too many people forced to do their jobs without the adequate experience to do it.

Unfortunately there is no rule or test for common sense.

All we do is watch the computer because we are constantly run around by deadhead crews while we are waiting for a train.

Affecting workplace safety is the revolving-door rulebook that changes daily.

I have been tested 21 times, had four failures, with 132 different rules, and not once has an officer ever said that we were doing a good job.

I believe there needs to be much better training on territory qualifications.

The only time a switch gets oiled or adjusted is if someone calls it in as being hard to throw. If one person were to call all of them in, management would think they are whining.

There is nothing wrong with listing a train’s movement in station order on the line it is running on ahead of other trains even if it will get run-around enroute at some point, which should give a better idea when we might be going to work.

Employees feel threatened by mass confusion and constant change, which leads to loss of focus and bitterness.

Many trainmasters have little knowledge of railroading beyond their limited
classroom training. They have a “gotcha” attitude that creates an environment that is adversarial rather than cooperative.

Not knowing when I am going to work and not knowing when to get my rest is a definite safety hazard. Usually both of us on the crew are equally tired.

Some test to get it done and some keep at it until they find something.

Some don’t understand the rule they are watching us for. We never have a rules or safety class.

The piling on of new rules and frivolous demands are distractions in themselves.

While working, most members of our crew look for testing, not actual safety hazards. This is due to managers wanting us to fail.

Production quotas always take priority in the daily switching operation. When a defect is reported a manager evaluates the problem and says it’s okay to use anyway.

Trash and tripping hazards everywhere.

I always have to be thinking about if they are hiding in the weeds.

I’m not perfect by any means, but the rulebook is thicker than the Bible! Even someone who tries to work by these rules cannot possibly do so.

The carrier does not allow power naps. I have been with engineers that stayed awake in sidings and at stop signals only to have them have a hard time staying awake finishing the trip.

Our train lineup is not accurate enough for us to plan our rest.

I have noticed when I report unsafe conditions on the hotline, the carrier at times shows the condition to be corrected, when in actuality it really is not a true statement. It only looks good when someone is reading the reports.

It is the inability to plan our rest that creates the danger.

An employee who is always looking over his shoulder for a company officer hiding in the bushes trying to find you breaking a minor rule, especially a young employee, will never work safe and will never be focused on his job and will be danger to himself and others.

I heard a first line supervisor say don’t drag the job or you will get a failure.

My biggest concern is when I get called for a job I’ve never done and the carrier denies me a pilot. It’s very dangerous being on a job in an unknown area for the first time.

The changing of the lineup happens at one time or another almost each day. This seems to be, for me, the most crucial element of not being able to get proper rest before having to report for duty, especially at the away-from-home terminal.

Dispatchers will ask how long a task will take and want a time commitment. The company wants us to hurry, yet the word “hurry” isn’t anywhere in the rulebook.

As a yardmaster the most unsafe thing we do is work while we are tired. Yardmasters do not fall under the hours-of-service law. We are required to double through to a second shift if nobody else is available. This means we are required to sit in the same location, without the ability to leave, for 16 straight hours.

I have seen engines reported for defects at least five times in the last month yet no one knows anything about it and your ordered to just take it because “there is no one here that can fix it.”

Biggest distraction is conductor’s log. Because penalty for multiple missing entries is so severe it takes precedence when, at times, situational awareness would dictate focus in other job areas.

Even when I report safety issues it seems that the carrier doesn’t address them in a timely manner.

Good railroaders need mentoring. Give me a chance to develop these young, talented railroaders. When they are ready, let their peers decide.

The things that we most often are being tested on are minor rules infractions. This puts a great level of stress on the employee.

Far too many officers have no experience doing real railroad work yet are told to tell us what to do and how to do it. Far too often we are asked to operate unsafely because they really do not understand what is happening.

At times I feel forced to hurry by company officials that stand and watch and, at times, hide and watch. The threat of constantly being disciplined is extremely distracting.

There have been too many changes in rules and too many different interpretations by company officers, so even though I might think I’m complying some officer might not.

It seems that managers try to get creative to compete with the knowledge of either the employee or another manager. I often find myself looking, nervously around, for tricky managers rather than focusing on the task at hand.

We are more concerned about not missing a little step in the procedure and losing our job than the job at hand or safety.

Way too much rushing you out the door when you get to work. No time to update time books, get operating bulletins, job briefings, etc. Every day is the same story. The second you walk in the door “we need you to get going right away….gotta get this train out and moving.”

Having a trainmaster hover over me while I look over my train papers or utilize the bathroom is just ridiculous.

Biggest problem is being watched by inexperienced supervisors.

The morale has never been so low and lack of truly experienced carrier officers so high.

When I report issues, I get the feeling they do not really care until somebody gets hurt.

We need bosses to tell us when they see us doing something wrong, instead of trying to fire us.

We are tested constantly and are treated with no respect whatsoever.

The last rule added to test brake effectiveness is a good example. It may work well for road trains left in a pass, but working trains, locals to be specific, are really hampered by the rule, and in some cases you don’t have enough cars to place brakes on to hold the balance of the train that is going to cut away. I was told to use my railroad experience in such cases. The rulebook is used only when it is convenient to the carrier.

This is my 35th year on the railroad and I have been in a constant state of unrest for practically the whole time. I’m not sure when anyone will realize I am the only person that can tell you when I’m tired. No amount of regulating, policymaking or rulemaking will ever change that fact.

I love my job. I want to work safe, but the company keeps saying that we are taking too much time.

Why is it that every time a FRA official comes onto any carrier property, they are always joined at the hip by one or more carrier officials? They never come on property with union or state legislative officials to converse with crews.

One of the most dangerous things is wide-body engines that have the angle cock on the head-end on the engineer’s side. I’m constantly climbing over these engines to turn the angle cock just to climb back over to turn an angle cock on cars I’m switching. On the road you have to go to the live track side to get to these angle cocks.

I feel that there is a greater pressure on first-line supervisors to find failures than to promote safety.

Click here to see a summary, in percentage terms, of member safety concerns.

Also, the UTU Rail Safety Task Force has its own Web page, accessible at www.utu.org by clicking on the red “Rail Safety Task Force” button.

 July 19, 2010

By UTU Assistant President Arty Martin

Fatigue is a serious problem for pilots and flight attendants. Flight attendants additionally are without protections afforded under the 1970 Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA).

The UTU, working with the Transportation Trades Department of the AFL-CIO, as well as the Air Line Pilots Association and the Association of Flight Attendants, is focused on both of these issues on behalf of UTU’s airline industry members.

Current Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations permit lengthy and irregular shifts across multiple time zones. There are numerous instances of flight crews being given only eight hours of rest between shifts, and that includes travel to and from the airline terminal, which frequently permits as few as three to five hours of actual sleep.

As we know too well in the railroad industry — and as has been documented by sleep scientists at major universities — going to work fatigued is like going to work drunk. The difference is that an intoxicated person sobers up; but a fatigued transportation worker only becomes more fatigued.

Federal regulation and enforcement is needed, and additional help is on the way with the recent confirmation by the Senate of former airline pilot Randy Babbitt to be the federal aviation administrator. Prior to his nomination by President Obama to head the FAA, Babbitt served on an independent review team examining and making recommendations to improve the FAA’s aviation safety system.

In fact, Babbitt said in June that the FAA will propose, by fall, new limits on how many hours airline pilots can fly. Babbitt said the new limits will take into consideration that pilots flying routes with numerous takeoffs and landings experience more fatigue than pilots on longer flights with only one takeoff and landing.

Current FAA regulations permit pilots to be on duty up to 16 hours, with eight hours of scheduled flight time, and airlines can order them back to work with as few as eight hours between shifts.

The February crash of a commuter plane near Buffalo, N.Y., which killed 50 people, gives greater urgency to revising aviation hours-of-service rules because it was determined that the co-pilot of the doomed flight commuted overnight from near Seattle.

Babbitt said, also, that he wants airlines — including commuter carriers — to participate in two safety programs studying airline safety.

As for flight attendants, they are currently under FAA safety-rules jurisdiction rather than OSHA rules. Yet, the FAA has never prescribed or enforced safety and health standards or regulations, which are the core of OSHA regulations. The administration of George H.W. Bush refused to impose specific workplace protections in the aircraft cabin that had been informally agreed to by airlines.

So it is that the UTU, the AFL-CIO Transportation Trades Department, the Air Line Pilots Association and the Association of Flight Attendants are working jointly in support of legislation requiring the FAA to establish regulations to provide a cabin environment free from hazards that can cause physical harm.

It is expected that Babbitt will move to set such rules, although legislation would ensure they could not be tampered with by future administrations less concerned with workplace safety.

By UTU International President Mike Futhey

For more years than I care to count, we having been telling the carriers that if we couldn’t come up with a mutually acceptable solution at the bargaining table to the problem of availability policies and train-crew fatigue that we were going to ask Congress to impose a solution.

And still the carriers dithered, placing profits ahead of safety and ignoring the quality of life and safety threats of 30-day availability policies, seemingly never-ending limbo time, rolling the dice on circadian rhythms with wild swings in start times, and assuming human beings could maintain situational awareness as their cumulative sleep deficits mounted.

We provided the carriers with exhaustive evidence of train crews being called to work in a fatigued condition; and reminded the carriers that sleep scientists have concluded that going to work fatigued is equivalent to going to work drunk.

Even in the face of horrific accidents involving deadly hazmat releases and NTSB findings with regard to crew fatigue, the carriers continued to ignore our pleas to negotiate a solution to the fatigue problem. The carriers refused to negotiate.

So we went to Congress in the fall of 2008 which enacted the most far-reaching rail safety bill in decades. It was our only relief. The law didn’t give us everything we wanted, but it is a good, overdue and necessary law.

Most troubling now is that even with the new safety law’s changes in hours of service and limbo time elimination, the carriers continue to resist providing train and engine service employees with predictable starting times.

How can it be that an industry so fully computerized can’t provide its operating crews with predictable starting times?

The fact is, the railroad industry can.

In fact, on Canadian National, which Wall Street analysts say is the most efficient North American railroad, senior management is committed to train scheduling. CN CEO Hunter Harrison considers this good business, safe business and appropriate labor-management policy.

We are now negotiating with CN in hopes we can reach agreement permitting CN and the UTU jointly to petition the Federal Railroad Administration for a pilot project — under provisions of the new safety law — to demonstrate every railroad can efficiently provide train and engine-service employees with start and stop times within a predictable range of hours.

We stand willing to negotiate with any carrier a similar joint petition to the FRA for such a pilot project if that carrier is agreeable to structured start times.

Our objective is a changed culture that reduces employee fatigue, fully eliminates limbo time, assures situational awareness of all crew members, improves our members’ quality of life, boosts customer service, and contributes positively to each carrier’s bottom line.

It is high time to bring the railroad industry into the 21st century. This pilot project has the potential to do just that.

A sleep disorder is a dangerous medical condition; but, in most cases, treatment can be effective.

For this reason, a labor-management joint task force has agreed, in writing, that an employee with a treatable sleep disorder who is receiving proper treatment and is otherwise complying with the safety and operating requirements of the job, should have no fear that he or she would become disqualified from work.

A sleep disorder statement to that effect has been issued by the rail industry’s Work/Rest Task Force, comprised of representatives of the United Transportation Union, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, and the Class I railroads, which include BNSF, Canadian National (U.S. lines), Canadian Pacific (U.S. lines), CSX, Kansas City Southern, Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific.

The statement also has been approved by the industry’s Safety and Operations Management Committee (SOMC), comprised of the chief operating officers of the member railroads of the Association of American Railroads (AAR).

The sleep disorder statement is as follows:

Sleep disorders, like any other medical condition potentially affecting the safe performance of essential job functions or the safety of co-workers or the general public, require an individual assessment of the employee diagnosed with the condition to determine medical fitness for service and the necessity of any appropriate reasonable accommodations. The carrier’s medical policy for assessment of sleep disorders is intended to neither diminish in any way the employee’s responsibility for failure to comply with operating and safety rules, nor infringe upon an employee’s rights under an existing collective bargaining provision.

There are more than 80 different types of sleep disorders, ranging from insomnia (the inability to sleep) to narcolepsy (uncontrolled sleeping). The most common form of sleep disorder is sleep apnea, affecting as many as 18 million Americans. People with untreated sleep apnea stop breathing repeatedly during their sleep, sometimes hundreds of times during the night, and often for a minute or longer.

A recent study found that 60 percent of American adults experience sleep problems, but few recognize the importance of adequate rest, or are aware that sleep problems can be prevented and managed.

The good news is that most sleep disorders can be treated and most health insurance plans cover the diagnoses and treatment costs. If you suspect that you may have a sleep disorder, please discuss your problem with your physician or see a sleep disorder specialist.

For more information about sleep disorders and other sleep-related issues, go to the National Sleep Foundation’s website at www.sleepfoundation.org.

Additionally, go to http://www.utu.org/, look to the left blue margin and click on “Health care.” Toward the bottom of that page, click on “Health Columns by Dr. Norman K. Brown,” the UTU’s medical consultant. Then, click on Dr. Brown’s column, “New hope for the sleepless.”

By Norman K. Brown, M.D.
UTU Medical Consultant

Difficulty getting a good night’s sleep has been a problem of men and women since the beginning of time. Stress, stimulants such as caffeine, illness and irregular work schedules all are well recognized by all of us as causes of insufficient or irregular sleep.

Some medical conditions, such as frequent urination or pain, may trigger restless sleep, nightmares and insomnia.

Another medical condition — sleep apnea — has only recently been recognized as an important cause of bad sleep. And apnea causes sleepiness during waking hours, which can be dangerous for those who operate trains, buses, automobiles and machinery.

Sleep apnea can in many instances be treated successfully, so let’s review some of the signals of its presence.

First, snoring is often a complaint of your bed partner. The snoring can be a result or a blockage of the airway, usually when the soft tissue in the rear of the throat collapses and closes during sleep.

Your partner is usually the first person who first suspects the diagnosis of sleep apnea, because the snoring is coupled with periodic complete stoppage of breathing (apnea) for short periods during sleep. This causes fragmented and poor quality sleep, which is why sufferers of sleep apnea are tired during waking hours.

If you are experiencing snoring coupled with periodic stoppage of breathing, talk with your doctor. He or she may then advise a special sleep study, where you sleep while wearing monitoring equipment to confirm whether you do indeed not breathe for a few moments during sleep. The test also monitors the oxygen level in your blood during this apnea (no breathing) period.

It is important to understand that apnea can result in reduced oxygen levels in the blood that can trigger heart attacks and strokes. This is why it is so important to speak with a doctor if you exhibit signs of sleep apnea.

If such testing indicates treatment would help you, there are several options, and your doctor can help you decide which, if any, you should choose.

For example, there are medical devices called a c-pap and bi-pap available to keep the breathing passages open while you sleep. Certain surgical procedures may also help.

For many sufferers of sleep apnea, simply losing weight is helpful because it reduces the tissue mass that is blocking the airway during sleep.

If you suspect sleep apnea in yourself or a family member, consult your physician, as diagnosis and treatment is generally covered by your health-care insurance. Treatment can save your life and prevent a heart attack or stroke. It can also help you avoid a serious accident at work and solve the snoring that may be quite annoying to your partner.

For more information, visit the Sleep Apnea Association website at www.sleepapnea.org/geninfo.html.