The "Training Bus Instructor" (TBI) spends hours diligently working with a new hire candidate to provide basic skills training. Through this process, the required skills and knowledge successfully transfers to the student operator and they are released to a "Route Familiarization Operator" (RFO) that will help them learn the routes.
And then, the RFO compromises everything the student recently learned by saying, "Welcome to the real world, now watch me show you how to really drive a bus."
Does this sound like a familiar story? How do we prevent this from happening? By providing a clear distinction between who is teaching the student “how to drive” and who is teaching them “where to drive.”
First off, some agencies may identify RFO's using other titles, such as “Line Trainer,” “Line Instructor,” “Route Instructor” or whatever. I guess you can identify these individuals with whatever title you like, but you may want to start right there and leave any association with the term “instructor” to those that directly administer the basic skills on the training bus. These are the true instructors — the people responsible for teaching students the correct way to operate the bus. Put another way, how to operate a bus according to the agency’s standards.
The title of “Instructor” is well earned and brings great pride and honor, as not everyone can assume the role of an instructor. Instructors possess a unique set of skills, knowledge, experience and abilities needed to help others learn. TBIs should be held in high esteem for what they do, so it may help for them to be easily identified as someone who bears the responsibility for training.
Perhaps, a means of identification such as a jacket, cap, patch, or maybe even removing them from a “uniform” and putting them in the formal attire of a shirt and tie might be in order.
Let’s take a look at what should be taken under consideration when selecting RFOs:
- Attendance Record - Do they come to work?
- Passenger Complaints - How do they interact with customers?
- Lateness - Are they reporting for duty on time?
- Driving Record - number of collisions/incidents?
- Would you want your loved one to be transported by this operator?
- Can you ensure that the RFO is leading by example and promoting what the instructors have taught?
- Are the RFOs familiar with the latest training methods being administered at the training center, so they are not surprised by the student’s actions?
- Have the RFOs been observed on the road, or brought back to the training center, to ensure they are still at the top of their game?
Just as the Training Bus Instructors should be recognized for what they do, RFOs deserve the same treatment. How are they identified? Here are a few incentives/ideas:
- An increase in hourly salary for time spent with a student.
- A framed head shot photo placed in a designated RFO area of the operators swing room (This acknowledgment among peers may encourage others to want to be part of this team).
- A jacket, shirt or patch with the operator being identified as an “official RFO.”
If a student is expected to be “trained “ in basic skills by an RFO — after they have been advanced from the Training Center, which should indicate that they have already met the required standard — then they should have been terminated at the completion of their basic skill development training. No additional skills training should be needed once a student is released from the training center to learn the various routes of the system.
The RFO must be assured that when they receive a student from a TBI, that the student already has demonstrated the ability to move into passenger service or they wouldn't have been assigned to them in the first place. Ensure both “Basic Skill Training Bus Instructors” and “Route Familiarization Operators” know and understand what message each are to give to new operators.
Being consistent with respect to their roles and messages are fundamental keys. Reserve the titles of instructor/trainer to those that are primarily conducting those functions.
In case you missed it...
Read our METRO blog, "Winter wreaks havoc, leaves transit weary."
The RMS occurred last month in Albany, N.Y. and it was a truly remarkable learning experience for those in attendance. The RMS serves as a one-of-a-kind event that brings together transit risk management professionals from all across the country to focus on key topics related to safety, risk management, planning and prevention.
I recently attended, and had the opportunity to be part of a panel of speakers, at the NYC MTA Bus Safety Symposium. A variety of topics were discussed regarding bus and pedestrian safety issues. What was obvious is we all have a common goal to provide the safest transit systems possible, in spite of the possibility of increasing bus/pedestrian and bus/cyclist collisions.
I have had it with the never-ending meeting of the minds on the predominant causes of left-turn bus-pedestrian collisions. This whole issue is getting obscured with presentations that slice and dice every possible cause of these incidents into a collection of symbols, numbers and formulas. Please stop.
Statistics show that for many people, sleep can be a matter of life or death. This may sound overly dramatic, but let’s consider that in 2005 the NHTSA conservatively estimated that drowsy driving was responsible for at least 100,000 automobile crashes, 71,000 injuries, and 1,550 fatalities annually.¹ More recently, the NHSTA estimated at least 846 people died in 2014 due to the effects of drowsy driving.
Nowadays, there’s an app for everything. Very few of those apps can turn an everyday transit rider into a hero who summons help for a person in distress. A routine ride on your transit system can be suddenly disrupted if you witness an assault, a crime in progress or a medical emergency. That is why apps designed for public safety must take all imaginable scenarios into consideration.