Deadly Sleep Disorders

The NTSB report on the rear end collision in Iowa about a year ago says this:

“Had the requirements described in Safety Recommendations R-02-24, -25, and -26 been in place, this crew would likely have been identified as at high risk for sleep disorders, which may have led to appropriate medical intervention.”

Why does BNSF not have Safety Recommendation R-02-24, -25, and –26 in place?

If a cre

Frequently sleep disorders are treated by 1) a sleep study in a hospital; and 2) if necessary a prescription for a CPAP machine. I have one and I am sleeping much better. The machine does have a recorder to measure compliance so if you have a OTR truck license, it will be suspended if you are out of compliance. I do not know about air, sea or rail, but I assume the same can be done.

THAT SAID… Positive Train Control makes more sense. Is if foolproof? No, NYCT proved that, but properly implemented the train is automatically stopped if a signal is improperly passed. Every little bit helps.

ROAR

I knew a guy in the drug testing business. He told me that most industry managers, including railroad insdustry, could not afford to have testing done on active crews because they would lose them for 24 hours to serveral weeks and months. So, avoid, avoid, avoid. Lay a train up someplace out in the wilderness so the crew won’t get tested; call the drug tester in then don’t have any trian crews because the train got in sooner than the tester arrived or got hung up someplace out there somehwere; or not call the known offenders in to work when the tester was going to be there. Also, don’t use testers who follow rules and instructions and procedures.

So carry this thinking to sleep, turnaround time, “the law”, the rules, the need to have that train out at something o’clock come Hell or Highwater, no other crews avaialbe on full rest or whatever. ANd there is the guy who needs to work, needs the time, has to get out there, has to get back soon. There are so many facits to rules, time off, rest, rest vs sleep, sleep vs time off. I remember one time an engineer friend came to a meeting 40 miles from his home because he was last out on the board, no trains in sight the caller said. He came in the door to the meeting and he got a two hour notice call because two ahead on the board knocked off and an extra was called. If he had been a drinking man or doing drugs, he would have had a hard decsion to make as would his supervisors. There are many, many sides to this issue of sleep and rest and fatigue, and no one answer.

I’m with Henry6, way too many variables, one size does not fit all.

Since this thread is based on Safety Recommendation R-02-24, -25, and –26; what are they?

Federal law requires random drug testing of T&E employees, and the testing company has to have a Federal License to perform such test.

The results are reported to the FRA and the carrier, in that order, any employee found to have a drug or alcohol problem is removed from service.

Carriers have no choice in that matter, is a the law,

Depending on whether this is a first time offender or not, they will be offered counseling and rehabilitation , part of the National Labor Contract, but you only get one shot at it, then you are truly fired, if you are an engineer, your Federal Engineers License is revoked, if you’re a conductor or brakeman, your conductors certificate is revoked.

The FRA monitors how many and how often a carrier, be it a Class 1, 2 or 3 perform random testing, and will fine carriers who do not follow the law,

Any FRA reportable accident/incident requires a drug and alcohol test.

In 15 years, I have had over 20 random tests.

This is one of those things carriers are not going to shirk…

As for a disorder like sleep apnea, your physician is required to report it to the FRA, similar to doctors having to report gunshot wounds.

Most carriers will not test a T&E employee for a sleep disorder unless there is sufficient concern, in that the employee has been disciplined several times for sleeping on the job.

If, and only if a doctor reports to the carrier and the FRA that an employee is being successfully treated for such a disorder, will that employee be allowed to continue in T&E service.

If the disorder was something you had before you became employed, you will be terminated, (it is one of the standard questions on all railroads employment application forms) because you were untruthful on the application.

This limits the carrier’s liability/risk.

If your doctor reports the condition developed during your employment and con not be successfully treated, then the contract has provisions for

http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/sa200404.pdf

Most railroads have it in their safety rules that any employee who develops a medical issue as defined must report it to the carrier.

Right now the Big one in OTR is BMI if it is to high bang Automatic Sleep Study required to keep your CDL per the Regulations. However they are finding out that BMI is NOT the Catch all that they thought it was. Fully 40% of the people with CDL’s with issues are thinner than rails. They have found out that Sleep Apnea is caused by a reaxation of muscues in the throat and when that happens your in trouble.

Ed, thanks once again for a thoughtful essay, and that link. [bow]

Rhetorical question, for consideration, deliberation, and discussion: What does the correlation, cause-and-effect linkage, or ‘confidence level’ between a condition (sleep disorder, high blood pressure and cholesterol levels, etc.) on the one hand, and the likelihood or pre-disposition for a performance failure (falling asleep while on duty, heart attack or stroke, etc.) on the other hand, have to be for a particular individual employee to be deemed to be “at risk”, or for the symptom to be deemed a “sufficiently reliable” indicator/ predictor of the performance failure for many employees, such that the correlation justifies removing the employee from service (and income) and subjecting him/ her to the testing, etc. ? 10 % of the time ? 30 % ? 50 % ? 80 % 95 % ? 100 % ? And what other variables can - and do - affect a particular instance of performance within that range ? (e.g., coffee ?)

I don’t have any pat or simple answers. MY gut tells me that 10 % is too little, but by 30 to 50 % it’s enough of a problem or risk to justify taking some action, and for sure by the 80 % range.

  • Paul North.

Paul,

That’s part of the problem, there is no objective legally defined amount…its totally a subjective call on the carriers part, and often left up to the TM, who may base his remove from service decision on personal issues, likes and dislikes, so forth and so on.

The NTSB report mentions that locomotive alerters should not be used as a substitute for a fatigue mitigation program. Was there a locomotive alerter in operation during this Iowa collision? Isn’t the point of an alerter to prevent crewmembers from falling asleep? How could the crew have fallen asleep if there was an operating alerter?

Most likely the locomotive was equipped with an alerter. Let me tell you, I dont care what kind of alert system you have and how loud it it, when you are dead tired nothing seems to work. It only takes a second for things to happen, now you throw in fatigue and this is what can happen.

This seems like as good a thread as any to throw this out to. Some entrpenureal genius I hope will take this idea up and study it to see where it might lead. Instead of the railroads maintiaing rosters, employing crews, there be labor pool company instead. This company would employ engineers and conductors and then contract with the railroads to provice their services. This company would not be tied to just one railroad but to many or all. They would provide properly rested and qualified engineers and conductors (airline pilots, plumbers, truck drivers, what have you) to the proper place at the proper time. This company would be the employer of the job catagory(ies) and pay and benefit them; the company would be paid by the railroads (airlines, pipelines, plumbers, trucking, bus companies). The hours of service, proper rest, drug testing, everything, would rest on the shoulders of this new company. In theory they would compensate the employees in a manner so that there would be on problems missing a day or call and would be able to provide the proper employee at the proper place at the proper time…it may mean employees would be slaried, the union would probably approve, Labor Department would have to agree (why not?). If the company would have large enough crew bases in major areas with the idea of servicing more than one railroad…thus a crew could be out on ARR one day, BRR the next, all assignement could be covered on all railroads with enough crews so that fatigue, sleep, away from home time, etc, would not be the major problem that it is today. AIrlines and their pilots could gain some of the same benefits with a similar service. Railroads, airlines, etc. could still employ people for set job assignements and use the Pool Company for fill in or rely totally on the Pool Company. There is a lot of things to think about, iron out, work out. It is not a simple “no” because anythng is possible when it is needed.&

What could the pool company do to prevent sleep disorders that the railroads could not do for their own employees?

This was a GE Dash 9 locomotive, and it comes standard with an alerter, part of the engine management computer program.

They go off every 90 seconds if I remember correctly, unless a control surface, like the throttle or the brake handle is moved, which resets the alerter.

Sounding the horn or ringing the bell will also rest the alerter.

The alerter is loud shrill sharp chirping sound, and once it starts, if it is not canceled it becomes progressively louder, after 30 seconds it is so loud as to become painful, at that point the locomotive computer programming will begin to reduce the throttle, and perform a brake pipe reduction, progressively slowing the train and bringing it to a stop.

It is possible to bypass the alerter, but if you are caught running a locomotive with a by passed alerter, it results in immediate termination.

That’s a federal law, not open to debate on the employees or the carriers side.

When I was working our extra board, I made several runs with an engineer who could sleep while running, and who kept his hand right over the alerter button, the instant it began, he would press it, canceling the alert, somewhat like a person who presses the snooze button on their alarm clock repeatedly.

My guess, and this is only a guess based on my personal experience, is that this crew was running the same way, the conductor may have fallen asleep, possible into a deep sleep, and the engineer was catching a nap also, just above the point where REM sleep or deep sleep happens, canceling the alerter every time it came on.

The event recorder keeps track of when the alerter goes off, how soon it is canceled and what was done to cancel it, be it the cancel button was pushed or a control surface was moved, all signs the engineer was awake and functioning.

If the recorder shows the alerter immediately being canceled the moment it comes on, and this is constant over an extended period of time, this would raise suspicions,

Not to mention the difficulty of getting everybody qualified on every participating railroad.

At least the different scenery might keep some awake–at least for a while.

According to the NTSB report, working irregular schedules causes sleep disorders including the inability to stay awake at times. It this settled science? Or is it agenda-driven junk science?

If it is settled science, it poses a very large problem for the railroad industry. Many railroaders work irregular schedules. How can it be acceptable that they are working at tasks where a loss of attention can prove fatal, and yet, they are subject to involuntarily falling asleep at any time?

If what the NTSB says about irregular schedules causing sleep disorders is true, then one of two things must be done:

You may think this heresy, but the few times I had a locomotive with an alerter, if I was extremely tired I did that very tactic. You couldn’t trust the conductor to help you stay awake (except from his snoring). And taking a short alerter-ending naps is less dangerous that falling in to a deep sleep while at the controls (have done that also). Plus, if one really knows the territory, using the alerter as a snooze alarm isn’t as dangerous as it sounds, except for the danger of getting into the pattern of hitting the alerter too many times when still fairly asleep (who of us hasn’t woke up to our alarm, surprised that it was already on the second, third, or fourth or more reset?).

Of course, doing any of the above is extremely dangerous. But sometimes one has to make do with the best option available. And sometimes the price is paid. In full.

http://my.clevelandclinic.org/disorders/Sleep_Disorders/hic_Shift_Work_Sleep_Disorder.aspx

If you read this short link from the Cleveland Clinic, a highly-rated medical center, I think you will discover that Shift Work Sleep Disorder is an accepted diagnosis. It relates to disruptions in the normal Circadian rhythm. Your all-or-nothing reasoning to a conclusion about what should be done in consequence is a nice example of a fallacious form of the argument known as reductio ad absurdum. Read the clinic’s guidelines for decreasing the effects of SWSD.

When I was working nights, I stayed on nights even on my nights off. But then I was not running a locomotive. It was far more difficult to work moving shifts, but that is what most railroaders do.

Do we simply stop the trains at night? Some transit systems do just that.

Me thinks more people need to be hired, and then assigned to a shift, and cannot be called for a train that starts outside of that shift.

ROAR