The point of the inward cameras is not about watching them to spot violations. The point is to stop violations by making the crew aware of the possibility of being watched by the presence of the camera. The cameras could be fake and still make things safer. <
I really don’t think the presence of a camera, fake or not, will keep someone awake if they are sleep-deprived or otherwise ‘conscious-impaired’, whatever the cause, nor do I think there is evidence that it will. Losing consciousness, for whatever reason, generally isn’t a willful act, and a camera won’t make any difference. And would a camera affect the actions of an employee prior to their shift? Not likely, since they didn’t intend to fall asleep/lose consciousness anyway, knowing the consequences.
And, yes, I used ‘reliably’ in my statement above on purpose. If a system is to be employed in a mission-critical situation, it must above all else, be reliable. If it isn’t, why use it?
If the cameras play a role in preventing sleep, that’s fine, but that is not expected. Falling asleep is regarded as being beyond willful control, as you say.
The way the sleep issue will be delt with is with testing for shift work disorder, and either successfully treating the employee, or taking him or her out of safety sensitive service. The alternative method of dealing with it is a personal consciousness monitor.
OK. We now know, thanks to Rockefeller at MNRR, that only an exam can reveal sleep apnea and not by the individual’s self exam. Therefore, instead of a camera to watch for the engineer to fall asleep, all should be tested or examined or whatever for signs of sleep apnea. We also know abrupt changes in schedules will cause a problem in sleep patterns. A camera isn’t going to change that…but a study and program of determining how to change patterns will or should.
I was intrigued, however,by the Japanese over the shoulder camera. Less intrusive and more able to see what is happening outside the cab. But still fairly useless in stopping the train. And, again, how can one person be viewing a hundred or more trains and engineers at once (and without going to sleep himself!). It is totally ludicrous.
A camera beamed at an engineer or motorman cannot be reliable to read a face despite the hocus pocus hype from computer gurus. It makes more sense to attach electric probes to the body to watch for signs of change in temperature, blood pressure, muscle tones, heart rate, brainwaves, etc. But even then each individual is so different each machine would have to be specifically designed to the individual person. A camera is probably only good to watch the engineer get injured or worse but I don’t see how it could produce a product quick enough to stop a train.
Only exhibitionists, entertainers, and egos like to be constantly watched. A camera does not produce pride. People would more likely over think a situation, second guess themselves, be looking at the camera rather than ahead, even the red light on the camera can be distracting! It is nothing more than a salve for managers and politicians, and a boom to the surveillance hardware industry.
Or a rule book that has been revised from simple declarative rules to one that has been written in the ‘gotcha’ form of legalese double jepoardy so that no matter what happens, good or bad, someone can be blamed.
Negotiation happens in other industries. Conditions of work are fair game. Why your union only does what it is told it can do by the railroad is perhaps a question you should be asking them.
It was often the unions that brought about many safety rules and appliances because the investor rail management wouldn’t. This is true of other industries, too. I’m not going to get political here by revealing who is behind the lie that the unions didn’t do anything.
The “rules” aren’t work rules, they are operating rules. Whether you stop at a stop signal or how a brake test is performed, whether you sound a whistle signal, where your authority to proceed on the main track extends to the first or last siding switch are not things to be negotiated.
We can negotiate some of the conditions we work under, but we cannot choose or create operating rules, and as Dave pointed out, the “rules” are just that, operating rules, not work condition or work performed rules.
Case in point, air gauges on the end of trains for the performance of initial terminal air test and yard to yard air test.
We can’t argue the need or use of such gauges….but we can negotiate who hangs that gauge and who performs the air test and under what conditions we can be required to hang the gauge.
In the case of the cameras, that will be federal law, we can’t negotiate them away, but we can try to negotiate when they can be used, who has access to them, under what conditions the cameras will be on, and what the images captured can be used for, (accident investigation, punitive punishment during internal investigations, things such as that) and what degree of privacy will be afforded the crew.
Thermonuclear reactions aren’t as hot as this inward camera subject.
Agreement: with y’all who say they are effectively ineffective in accident prevention, that unions have no say in the operating department’s rules content or adaption.
Examples: the terrifying realization that you just can’t keep your eyes open, or maintain conciousness, 4 AM, working on a yellow (approach signal) and you’ve just thrown ice-water on your face…I’ve been there…Done that!! And, at Taylor Yard, LA, Ken Miller, SP’s rules guru, I can’t laud or compliment his integrity or practical app’s of the rules, assembled in the early '80s, a seminar to work on and assemble the next western RR’s rulebook. I participated and can testify there were no reps from the Brotherhoods, (unions) present.
Please consider the results of a jury seeing 2 time stamped videos: 1 of the engineer or C&E, the other of the crossing they are approaching and, tragically, subsequently slaughter a person or people.
Could, and if they did, would life be saved, if they had acted differently; reasonably could they have been expected to perform thusly?
The cameras, injury law partnerships, D’ya hear Ka-Ching, the RR’s cash register emptying?
The problem is we are being recognized by people that may not understand. rockymidlandrr discussed about drying out clothes. So some brand new, fresh out of college manager watches a video and sees a crew member in a trailing engine stripped down to their skivvies. Now will they immediately freak out and try to write the crew member up for “inappropriate apparel”? Of course they can, but anyone who has worked the ground knows what it is like to be caught in a rainstorm and soaked to the bone. It’s not like the crew member was flagging a crossing in their tightey-whiteys, but is instead buried deep in a yard track in the middle of nowhere.
Or a crew makes a disparaging remark about a manager while sitting at a stop signal at 3am. Will that trainmaster have thick enough skin to not retaliate? After all, every railroader worth his salt has been called every name in the book by their managers when they have their doors closed.
I think the camera issue could give a new meaning to “work to rule.” Mind you, I don’t advocate wholesale disregarding of rules, but I’m sure that the rules get bent a little from time to time, in the name of expediency. Most folks value their own health and safety, so it’s not like people are going to ignore safety. But if a rule bent just a little makes life better, what the heck?
Not if someone is watching over your shoulder. I’s will be dotted and t’s will be crossed. If it slows down the job, or even the division, well, that’s too bad.
Nobody’s trying to catch people changing clothes. Nobody’s trying to catch somebody calling the manager bad names (there is no audio on the video).
What the railroads are trying to figure out is why trains drive into the rear of the train ahead of them. Why a train gets a 1/4 mile past a red block. Why a crew blows by a red board and runs over a tamper. Why a crew passes an approach and accelerates. Why a crew enters the main track without authority. A very, very very small number of crews do those things, but that tiny fraction is a huge risk to themselves, their co-workers, the public, the customers and the railroad.
Shoving your locomotive 15 cars deep into the train ahead is “not bending the rules”.
The guy on the MMA may have bent a few rules, taken a few shortcuts, after all what will happen if you bend a few rules. After all its a little thing, its not like its going to kill 40+ people, level a town, put the railroad in bankruptcy, and put all your other co-workers out of a job.
" But if a rule bent just a little makes life better, what the heck? "
A whole lot of people in a wide variety of jobs have management looking over their shoulders and abusing their power for their own gain. What makes you think you folks are so special you should be immune to that, especially when safety is on the line?