A chemical car train could have been even worse.Now the article is saying something about the handbrakes.The police are not releasing exact results on that.The head of that railroad needs to be charged as well.He is responsible for being cheap and those people dying.I am sure that they already know how many handbrakes were applied and charges are coming.How about this CSX.Being cheap cost lives.CSX wants one person trains.Outlaw it now.Unsafe at any speed.
Uwin, evidently you do not realize that the agreements between the UTU and BLE prohibit the use of one man crews, They do want it, but they have already been shot down in court, and that was over 2 years ago. You need to get your facts straight.
The Union Pacific tried to implement one man crews during the 2007 contract. The BLET & the former UTU were successful in stopping it. Rail unions have been successful in outlining job descriptions within the crafts. The UTU unfortunately jumped on the yard remote control operation by implementing an agreement without the BLET and didn't place any language on the number of crew members. It started without a RCO conductor & switchmen then CSX used that loophole and now run one man RCO jobs.
And you should know by now that CSX never gives up.And the facts are that CSX has stated they do want it and will continue trying to get it.Agreements between 2 unions are like jello.Who has the spoon?Get you facts straight.There is no nationwide law against one man crews .Now would be the time to push for one.
John...You're right about the unionized carriers having two man crews. However, many of the non union carriers utilize one person crews which in my opinion is a factor in this disaster. I can see a new ruling coming from both the TSBC and the FRA regarding tying down trains before going off duty. uwin...the rule says that a SUFFICIENT number of handbrakes must be applied to secure the train and a minimum number is given (1 for 10) only as a starting point, so it's an automatic rule violation should the train roll away. This makes the employee (in this case the ONLY employee) guilty of a rule infraction. The nonsense that Burkhardt says about a single employee on a hazmat laden train being safer practice than two because they have fewer distractions is beyond silly, the reason why any company cuts jobs isn't to be safer, it's to line their pockets at the expense of safety.