Posts
From: Terry Briggs [mailto:tslbchair@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 2:08 PM
To: 'Mike Davis'
Cc: Gil Gore; Tolman@BLE.org
Subject: RE: BLET Urges Congress to Eliminate Limbo Time Abuses
Brother Mike,
The hearing Brother Tolman testified at was a hearing on human factor causes of railroad accidents. Limbo time abuse was only one part of the testimony given by John Tolman and rail labor. John was joined by BRS President Dan Pickett, who spoke on technology, and UTU Alternate National Legislative Director, James Stem, who spoke on training issues.
Regarding staying alert during limbo time; Brother Tolman is referring to the practice of requiring a hogged-out crew to baby sit a train instead of securing the train before the expiration of the HOS. It is a common practice for a dispatcher to instruct a crew to not tie down a train because a relief crew is on the way. The only reason the crew is left on the train is to respond if something happens to cause the train to move. (See the attached FRA “attending a train” interpretation) A crew is also expected to direct the crew van to the train’s location. The railroads’ abuse limbo time because it saves time when the relieving crew does not have to knock hand brakes off the train, and the dispatcher can move the train closer to its destination during the time the crew would otherwise use to secure the train. In most instances the hogged-out crew does not even get paid extra for time spent after the expiration of the HOS.
Also, in the past five years on the UP railroad the number of crews exceeding 14-15 hours before tying up has steadily increased. This trend signals an increase in fatigue industry-wide because working long, irregular hours causes the build up of a sleep deficit which cannot be “paid back” in a single sleep event. The railroads’ abuse of limbo time contributes to this trend and must be addressed, possibly with legislation.
However, having said all this, I agree that knowing when you are going to be called to work is the single most important part of the whole fatigue issue. There is no reason why the railroads cannot provide a proper line-up, other than they are not willing to commit the resources to do so, and that reason is inexcusable.
In spite of testimony showing that =TL is a farce, the NTSB missed a golden opportunity to slap the UP on this issue in their report on the Macdona wreck. The board acknowledged the unpredictability of work, but rather than focus on the reason work is so unpredictable, (which resulted in the fatigued crew) they instead admonished the engineer and conductor for not taking advantage of a rest opportunity.
Getting a good train line-up is a top issue for the union, and John did discuss the issue at the hearing. He mentioned the final report produced by the collision analysis working group (CAWG) which concluded that management plays a major role in fatigue management, in particular, minimizing or eliminating unexpected and unplanned calls for duty. The release of CAWG’s Final Report has been delayed for nearly a year because the industry withdrew from the project after drafting was completed, largely because of CAWG’s conclusions concerning fatigue.
In summary, these are a couple of examples of the problem we face as a union in trying to get better train line ups. Also, although the article’s topic was abuse of limbo time, John’s testimony included other issues.
I hope this helps. If you have any other questions, let me know.
Fraternally,
Terry Briggs, State Legislative Chairman
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen - IBT
817-285-7668
chairman@tslb.org
