On Jan. 17, the Republican Congressman joined Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers’ Transportation Division officials by re-introducing the Smart Freight Act that would require one certified locomotive engineer and one certified conductor on all fright trains. Young previously introduced the same bill in 2013 and 2015 but it failed to get off the ground both times. The bill was initially a reaction to the deadly Lac-Mègantic, Quebec, oil train wreck in 2013.
“SMART has been working tirelessly to promote safety in the railroad industry,” says Transportation Division President John Previsich. “There is no doubt that the safest rail operation is a two-person crew operation. After several major train derailments, we must send a clear message to our lawmakers and the general public that multi-person crews are essential to ensuring the safest rail operations possible in their communities.”
But railroads disagree and they have been vocal in their opposition to efforts by the Federal Railroad Administration to implement a two-person crew rule.
“…[T]here are no data showing that having a two-person crew provides any safety benefit to railroads, their employees or the public,” AAR representative Kristin Clarkson tells Trains News Wire. “The AAR believes that any proposed rules or laws calling for two-person crews are misguided and will undermine its goal of making a safe rail network even safer.”
Mr. Cook, I don’t know where you got your information about previously being required to leave an unattended train in full release with only handbrakes applied, but at CN (I am CN locomotive engineer) we were always required to leave an unattended train with a full service brake reduction in addition to the minimum required handbrakes. The cars with the handbrakes applied were required to be bled off before applying the handbrakes.
Unless you are the railroads accountant, two man crews are common sense.
“There is no evidence that 2 man crews are safer than 1” Well there is no evidence inward facing cameras make the operation safer either- but they are hell bent on installing those- how convenient…
You people against 2 Men Crews are NUTS, Do you people know anything about railroads! So you got a engineer, now that second man in the cab is a life saver, so what do you do when one of the three units goes down, that second man can go back to the unit and shut it down rather than tie up a main line with a one man crew. now what if your train get hit by a hot box detector. the two person crew will cut time in half where as one man, stop the train and walk and check the 130 cars looking for that hot box, with a two person crew the conductor can get off the train, and have the train pulled by for a inspection. Don’t forget that conductor is just matter, there’s train lists, calling out signals, and seeing that everything is right in that cab, anything happens to the engineer, god forgive, that second man can stop the train also. I’ve been a conductor for over twenty-six years, you can’t sell me on one man crews.
Its obvious who’s pocket the AAR is in. This is all about putting more money in more fat cat’s pockets.
Hell let’s just go with crew less trains for crying out loud. If anybody thinks that 1 crewman on an 8000 ft manifest with tank cars full of hazmat that will KILL you is a good idea then that individual is an idiot or all they care about is the bottom line. We need two count them 2 sets of eyes looking out that windshield at all times PERIOD.
To those that say two person crews are required…I would suggest you look around the WORLD at all the successful one person crewed rail operations there are, and then tell me that two are required for a safe operation.
The Las-Megantic wreck was not the result of one man crew as the retrieving crews all knew how many hand brakes had to be released, and those crews relied on the engine air brakes to hold the train which was by Federal rule in full release, no air in the train line. The management of MM&A allowed the violation of insufficient hand brakes and all the crews knew it. The Federal law was immediately changed to require air in the train and hand brakes as well. The railroad permitted the counting the engines as a unit of 10%+2 but an engine only has 1 brake shoe pulled on with the brake wheel. Mr. Harding only applied 20 brake shoes on the 70 car train, so when then engine air brakes leaked off, 20 shoes will not hold such a train. The tug test of the hand brakes applies was done while the engine air brakes were applied, a violation. Ten per cent plus two only counting cars of the train would apply 9×8= 72 brake shoes tight against the wheels.
I find it interesting that this measure is being introduced by a member of a party that advocates for less government, has how many Class I railroads, whose state is really going to be effected by this legislation.
The only problem is that sometimes they both fall asleep and then they both get killed along with others. The only reason for two man crews is to have more union members paying more dues that will go in the pockets of the corrupt union leaders.
Of course there is no studies and facts about how two man crews are safer than one man crews because there are no answers to what transpired in the cab which may have avoided an incident. There are incidents where two men in the cab and only one man in the cab have been involved in accidents. But when something works the way it should and nothing untoward happens, how can you tell. One conversation or sentence between two people, innocent and even not work related, could have been a key in keeping the engineer from nodding off or having his mind wander off the track ahead. How can that be measured?