May 14, 2009

Is it going too far?

ARTICLE TOOLS


By  Alex Roman

To me, there were so many reasons not to own a cell phone. The least of which is my frustration of being stuck behind somebody on the road who is paying more attention to their phone call than their driving. Yet finally, after much chastising from family and friends, who felt it important for me to have one “just in case,” I relented less than two years ago.

Going to the store to buy a cell phone was a sad day, because to me cell phones will always be a nuisance. However, in the last two years, I have been in emergency situations where it paid to have one. For example, when my car was blindsided by another driver, who fled the scene, I was able to call the police, and the offender was located. There are also countless stories in the news of people involved in serious life and death situations where their cell phones came in handy.

In response to Friday's Green Line crash, Boston’s Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) is banning its bus, train and subway operators from using cell phones, iPods or paging devices while on duty. The ban even goes as far as disallowing operators from even carrying these devices. Operators who violate the new zero tolerance policy will be immediately suspended, with a recommendation for dismissal.

While I completely believe that using a phone while driving a vehicle is stupid and dangerous — and even more so when it is a heavy vehicle, such as a trolley, that has the potential to cause serious damage, not to mention kill hundreds of passengers — I can’t help but think that it may be a violation of MBTA operators’ personal rights. What’s going to happen when an operator is in an emergency situation (business or personal)? What do they do? When you ban something, there are always extenuating circumstances that make it seem as if it may be going a little too far. Do you think MBTA’s outright ban goes too far?


Write a letter to the editor
Tags:
deli.cio.us digg it stumble upon newsvine


  • Alan Gorman[ May 14th, 2009 @ 11:49am ]

    Yes it goes too far. It also puts the onus on MBTA to have 100% of all radios on the buses working 100% of the time. I suspect that they will revise this policy to ban device usage while operating, a more sensible approach.

  • A. [ May 14th, 2009 @ 12:02pm ]

    I understand where MBTA is coming from on this issue and I don't think it is going to far. Look at the Metrolink accident last September caused by someone on a cell phone. With that knowledge this accident in Boston still occured. Also the footage from Texas of the paratransit driver who rear ended a car on the freeway because they were text messaging. Unless people are going to resposible enough to NOT use the phones whille driving a bus or operating a train agencies will be forced to take these steps. It all comes back to personal responsibilty on the part of the employees who need to leave the cell phones off execpt on break and lunch.

  • Highlander[ May 14th, 2009 @ 1:57pm ]

    Both previous comments make good points. However, it has become obvious, as "A" points out, that cell phone use leads to accidents and even in the face of pretty sobering evidence (LA) some transit operators cannot be trusted to follow the rules -- and as long as the "select" few think that they are above the rules then all will have to suffer for their actions.

  • Bob O.[ May 14th, 2009 @ 2:03pm ]

    It is unconscionable that you would make a statement that the MBTA ban is a violation of their operators personal rights! What about the personal rights of those who perished (and their families) because an operator was using a cellular device while driving or controlling a vehicle? The problem with simply prohibiting the use of such devices while on duty is that it is nearly impossible to enforce. I know becuase we tried (and it failed). We are now looking at a policy similar to the MBTA. THe MBTA has every right to implement this policy - in fact, I believe it is their responsibilty to protect their riders and the general public.

  • busman[ May 14th, 2009 @ 2:11pm ]

    If a driver is caught drinking a soda and causes an accident, would you ban drivers from drinking anything all day? Would you ban them from carrying water bottles? If a driver was combing his hair and got in an accident, hey let's ban combs and hair brushes. If a driver was adjusting his underwear and got in an accident, hey ban underwear! This is ridiculous. Why not just ban the use of cell phones while driving??? Duh! Why do companies treat their employees like infants? They'll just end up acting like infants.

  • C Dunn[ May 14th, 2009 @ 2:29pm ]

    Transit vehicle operators should be allowed to carry cell phones, but ONLY to be used in an emergency.

  • J webster[ May 14th, 2009 @ 3:42pm ]

    One has to ask if the MBTA or other agencies will also make it a violation for their employee to use their radio communications equipment while they are operating a vehicle. It would seem that calling or answering a call on a radio handset to a dispatcher would be just as distracting as a personal cell phone.
    Public perception of safety is important and in this case agencies must take whatever steps necessary to insure the safety of the public. As for personal freedom, leave that at the door when you are responsible for others. IMHO

  • Fred[ May 14th, 2009 @ 4:02pm ]

    It's bad when I see VTA (Santa Clara Valley Transit) coach ops chatting on cells while operating a bus even as it's banned.

  • Laura Henry[ May 14th, 2009 @ 4:04pm ]

    This has been an issue that all transit agencies struggle with in their organizations. Unfortunately, as the Public Transit Superintendent, as much as you would like to trust your employees they do not follow the rules and feel it will only be for a minute and then a minute becomes 5 and then 10 and then it is a habit that the employee feels entitled to use their cell phone but potentially can cause accidents, injury and death because they wanted their "rights" preserved by using a cell phone. Blue tooth devices have been provided and yet they still hang the phone on the side and try to drive with one hand. As a public agency, public safety is #1 and the use of cell phones need to have a violation up to dismissal in order for employees to understand the importance of non-cell phone usage.

  • John V[ May 14th, 2009 @ 4:21pm ]

    There is only one reason an operator of a transit vehicle should ever need a cell phone while on duty and that is for emergency purpose only. As Highlander pointed out, it is a select few that screw it up for the majority that understand the significance of shutting off and putting away the device that may distract them from performing at the level necessary for the safety of the patrons and the public. As indicated by Bob O. the transit authority has the responsibility to provide the utmost safety for their patrons and the public, which in turn provides the agency the authority to implement policy that will up hold and provide that safety. Studies have proven that operators/drivers using a cell phone are less engaged with the surrounding environment and have delayed reaction to sudden changes in that environment, thereby causing the incident. Perhaps the cab can have a drawer for the operators personal materials, including cell phone that becomes locked when the unit is started and unlocked when the unit is shut down. It's standard procedure for operators to shut down units after an incident or when changing operators. This will allow the operator to have their personal materials with them, but prevent them from using the cell phone unsafely, but available when there is an incident.

  • Rado[ May 14th, 2009 @ 5:30pm ]

    I believe that any normal transit agency so far has implemented emergency systems for operator through different AVL/CAD initiatives independent of the their cell phone and there is no reason for them to carry one.

  • Mike Kavanagh[ May 14th, 2009 @ 8:32pm ]

    Most companies have a non smoking policy while drivers are behind the wheel. Does that mean that having a pack of cigarettes in their bag is grounds for dismissal?

  • Cass Roberts[ May 14th, 2009 @ 8:52pm ]

    No, it is about time that we start to realize this device can be done without. The communication systems today need to be up 100% of time, and the technology exists to make it happen. Using the excuse for cell phones, is much like a cane or crutch.

  • Howard Bingham[ May 14th, 2009 @ 9:53pm ]

    In Houston, Tx., METRO drivers have no need for cell phones as all buses & light-rail vehicles have built in two way communications with emergency dispatchers who can also notify drivers of accidents & route changes as result of accidents.

    New METRO buses also are being equipped with CCTV cameras similar to that on light-rail with multiple views which can be viewed by law enforcement after accidents, or the commission of a crime. (Older buses are gradually being retrofitted with such devices.)

    So IF transit agencies install two way communications in buses & rail, why the need of cell phones..?

  • Walter Jonchuck[ May 15th, 2009 @ 4:17am ]

    I agear with the ban. Most major transit systems have "Radio" systems installed on their equipment so contacting an operator is not differcult or the reverse if the operator needs to contact someone.
    Operators survivded the years before cell phones and did not have system radio vehicle communciations on the vehicles and accomplished what their where hired to do, operate their vehicle in a SAFE manner.

  • Elmira Yasin[ May 15th, 2009 @ 6:59am ]

    I believe operators can keep them in their bag, But not visible or in use while in service. If they are on a layover or a long split, and need to speak to their childeri or conduct business they should be able to.do so.
    But talking on a cell while operating has to be stick. One of the first things I hear when investigating a bus accident is the phrase " they came out of know where" , and that is with them paying full attention. Also, operators should be made aware to limit their liability for tickets or even lawsuits for operator inattention.

  • K[ May 15th, 2009 @ 7:03am ]

    I have read all these comments and see nothing talking about the people who trust these drivers to transport them safely!! Why put their lives at risk to protect the rights of the drivers who should know that they are not to talk on their cell phones while driving. Rights are only right in protecting when they are used in a manner as to not put others lives at risk.

  • Wendell Voisin[ May 15th, 2009 @ 7:18am ]

    I understand the reasoning and support the prohibition of cell phones for transit operators while operating vehicles. After reading the studies by reasearchers from the University of Utah and considering the recommendations of the National Transportation Safety Board on this subject, there can be no doubt cell phone usage while driving is a dangerous practice. It is irresponsible for transit managers not to implement policies or take action to eliminate known unsafe practices in the workplace that can injure or kill passengers, employees, and the general public. The risk involved in not implementing strigent policies is too great considering most public transit agencies have more than sufficient communication technology on board their vehicles for emergency situations. Also, another thing to consider is that in the unlikely event that all the vehicles on-board emergency features fail at the same time, there are usually passengers or other motorists who can place an emergency call and bring emergency responders to bear. The only real use for cell phones by transit operators while they are at work is for personal communications outside the workplace channels. There are proper methods in the workplace for transit operators to receive or place emergency calls which do not put anyone at risk. Taking an emergency call directly while operating a vehicle again puts people at risk, not only because of the cognitive impairment of the operator during the call, but also because of the operator's emotional state following the call. That is why I support this transit system in their cell phone policy .

  • Ben[ May 15th, 2009 @ 7:53am ]

    The American media and the American people are not going to tolerate any more cell phone related accidents by the transit industry. One east coast transit system has a simple, but effective solution. Operators, (train, bus, trolley, etc) are prohibited from carrying the cell phone on their person, but may have it in the personal bag (lunch bag, backpack, purse) that is with them in the vehicle. This way, the phone is available for an emergency or for personal use during a break, but will not be a distraction during the operation of the vehicle. Simple, fair, and it addresses all the issues. It is a win-win policy that should be adopted by all transit agencies.

  • Stephen J. Levine, MD[ May 15th, 2009 @ 9:29am ]

    Ban the use of cellphones by transit operators for non-emergency purposes only, or require they be used only when the vehicle is stopped. Don't ban the devices outright for the reasons stated above.

    sjl

  • Paul Farrell[ May 18th, 2009 @ 8:04am ]

    When I rode Golden Gate Transit to work (years ago), they had a customer safety hotline decal inside the bus. If I felt that the operator was driving unsafely, I could call it in with my cell phone. The dispatcher could contact the driver directly and investigate.

    Had MBTA passengers observed an operator "driving while INTEXTICATED" could they have reported them? This feedback loop enables operators to carry a device and they'd only need to be able to demonstrate that the call (where they used the cell) was an EMERGENCY (easy to do -- look up the phone number, length of call, etc.)

  • Former Employee[ May 22th, 2009 @ 7:28pm ]

    All the trains, light railtrolliesand buses have radios to call central control if there is a medical emergency,fight, holdup , breakdown or anything else that the operator needs to report. Cell phones are not part of the required equipment so you can talk to your kids,girlfriend, boyfriend or anyone else while driving a train or bus load of people trying to get to or return home from work. Most states now ban the use of and texting phones while driving a car. As a firefighter and EMT I have pulled more people out of crashed cars only to find a cell phone with a text message half written but not sent. Its not a good thing people

E-NEWSLETTER

Receive the latest Metro E-Newsletters in your inbox!

Join the Metro E-Newsletters and receive the latest news in your e-mail inbox once a week. SIGN UP NOW!

View the latest eNews
Express Tuesday | Express Thursday | University Transit

Author Bio

Claire Atkinson

Senior Editor

Claire is the Senior Editor of METRO Magazine.


Janna Starcic

Executive Editor

Janna is the Executive Editor of METRO Magazine.


Louie Maiello

Louie Maiello, former director of training, New York City Transit Bus & Safety Division and 2003 NTI Fellow, is the current Transit SME at FAAC Incorporated.


Alex Roman

Managing Editor

Alex Roman is Managing Editor of Metro Magazine.


Dan Reichard

Dan Reichard, a long-time member of the transit industry, was installed into APTA's Hall of Fame in 2006 and is an honorary member of APTA's Business Member Board of Governors.


Nicole Schlosser

Associate Editor

Nicole is Associate Editor for METRO Magazine.


STORE
METRO Magazine - January 2010

METRO Magazine
Here are some of the Highlights:
  • Motorcoach Top 50 Tough Out Economy
  • 7 Innovative Motorcoach Operators for 2009
  • Bus Management Supplement
    And much more…
  •  
    DIGITAL EDITION
    Sponsored by

    The full contents of Metro Magazine on your computer! The digital edition is an exact replica of the print magazine with enhanced search, multimedia and hyperlink features. View the current issue