Testing For Train Drivers In L.A. Proposed
Thursday, April 1st, 2010
Source: Los Angeles Times
Southern California’s commuter rail service engineers and conductors are staunchly opposed to newly proposed personality-profiling tests required as a result a 2008 Chatsworth Metrolink disaster that was linked to the drivers’ use of a cell phone while on the job.
The dispute sets up a potentially major labor-management clash just as the five-county Metrolink system is shifting to a new contractor to provide crews for trains that have nearly 1 million boardings a month.
The screening tests, frequently used by corporate managers to gauge the suitability of job applicants, are already required by Amtrak, the incoming operating contractor, when it hires engineers and conductors.
But two powerful railroad unions are strongly objecting to a Metrolink-Amtrak agreement finalized last week. It requires experienced crew members on the regional rail service to take and pass the tests to continue working on the system. Some have worked on Metrolink trains for years.
“We are not going to be taking these tests,” said Tim Smith, California legislative chairman of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen. “That’s it. We’ll see where it ends.”
“We’re all going to stand together,” said Ray Garcia of the United Transportation Union, which represents the conductors.
Union leaders say that, unless the dispute is resolved, Amtrak may not be able to field qualified train crews when it takes over operations this summer. Amtrak is set to assume operation of the 500-mile Metrolink system July 1. Connex Railroad, the current operator, opted not to pursue a contract extension when its relationship with Metrolink soured after the Chatsworth crash, which killed 25 and injured 135.
Metrolink board members say safety must come first, but they are likely to revisit the testing issue to ensure it is fair to the approximately 130 engineers and conductors now working on their trains.
Legal Challenges
It isn’t clear whether legal challenges would be implemented should Amtrak decide to push forward with the tests. California’s laws on mandatory testing are not set in stone. One NY employment discrimination lawyer may have a different opinion of that of a California work lawyer on the issue. And, there is no legally binding clause in state law that would preclude drivers from hiring a NY discrimination lawyer over one in their own state, if they thought they could receive favorable representation in a work denial case, or that of a firing of an existing worker who failed the testing.
The push for psychological screening was prompted by findings that a Metrolink engineer who repeatedly violated safety rules caused the Chatsworth catastrophe. Engineer Robert M. Sanchez, who died in the crash, had sent and received hundreds of text messages while operating trains, including seconds before he ran a red light and hit a freight train head-on, federal investigators concluded. In addition, evidence showed that Sanchez sneaked young rail fans onto locomotives and apparently let at least one sit at the controls. Such conduct was wildly irresponsible, Metrolink officials say, and occurred even though the veteran engineer had received good evaluations.
“You don’t want someone out there who’s having whatever psychological issues they are having that could jeopardize passengers,” said Metrolink board Chairman Keith Millhouse. But he added, “We are going to have to look at this and see if some kind of proper balance can be struck.”
Union leaders say the tests are not valid or relevant measures of a trained and experienced employee’s ability to safely operate trains. They say they don’t object to testing of potential hires who aren’t union members. But forcing existing train crews to pass the tests could arbitrarily cost good workers their jobs, they say.
“I think it’s strictly a witch hunt,” said Smith of the engineers union.
Also, longtime Amtrak employees who’ve never taken the personality tests would be allowed to transfer to Metrolink under the new contract, said conductors’ representative Garcia. “This is something that’s never, ever been required” of seasoned workers moving between operating contractors on railroads like Metrolink, he said.
At issue are tests Amtrak has used for several years to screen job applicants. A “personality inventory” for engineers is designed to reveal an applicant’s “work tendencies, habits and personality traits,” according to an Amtrak statement. It specifically seeks out “focused introverts” who are good at repetitive tasks and don’t allow themselves to become distracted by such things as cellphones while operating a train, according to descriptions provided by the rail company. The assessment was developed with union assistance and consultants and has been used since 2002, according to Amtrak.
Conductor candidates take two such tests: One is designed to gauge an applicant’s ability to interact with customers and deal with conflicts and emergencies. The other seeks to measure a person’s ethics and attitudes toward theft, drug use and other workplace concerns.
Amtrak declined to provide failure rates for the tests, but Garcia said about 20% of conductor applicants fail the ethics and attitudes test.
The written tests are part of an ongoing effort to overhaul Metrolink’s safety culture, agency officials say. Another initiative, last year’s installation of video surveillance cameras in train control cabs, has already sparked a legal battle with the engineers’ union.
Like the cameras, personality testing of train crews — and particularly locomotive engineers — is prudent because employees are responsible for hundreds of lives, said agency board member Richard Katz. “This is one more tool to help evaluate how an engineer might operate under stress.”
USC professor Robert Gore, a personality testing expert, said such screening can be valuable but might not flag an employee like engineer Sanchez. “These tests are far from perfect,” he said, adding that they should be used with great care and caution in screening existing workers who have not demonstrated problems.
Katz said he thinks the test results should be part of assessing existing workers but not necessarily a disqualifying factor. But he acknowledged that under the current contract language, Metrolink crew members “run the risk of not being employed” if they don’t agree to take the tests.
_____________________________________
My Take: Texting and driving is the real issue here, not personalities. I don’t care if you’re a defense law firm, or one of the high-powered bankruptcy attorneys out there. The laws on texting and driving need to be taken more seriously. In Los Angeles, where they passed a hands-free requirement for cells while driving law a few years ago, nearly 3 out of 5 drivers still ignores the law, and you can bet that when someone does something dangerous on the streets, they have one hand on the wheel and the other propping up a cell phone to their ear.
Very few drivers in Los Angeles seem to have a hands-free device for their phones. Add to that the rising number of teens getting behind the wheel each year who can’t sit down to dinner with their families without texting to friends. How can these young drivers be expected to obey the laws if we don’t toughen up the penalties for violating them?
Even criminal attorneys know the issues involving drivers, whether they are behind the wheel of a four-wheeler, a train, or a motorcycle, are serious and getting more so each and every year. Texting and driving is easily handled for the train drivers: scan them each day for phones like we would for weapons. Put cam-recorders in the caboose and keep an eye on them throughout their shift. Accountability is key. Testing for personality quarks is a separate issue.
———————————————————————-
Other Resources:
Lemon Law Confusion
There is a common misconception concerning the Lemon Law, which is that it only applies to vehicles that are less than one year old and have less than 12,000 miles on them. This belief is not true! The California lemon law applies to vehicles regardless of how old they are or how many miles they have. As long as the vehicle is having warranty problems, the Lemon Law may apply. Even if the warranty has expired, the Lemon Law may apply. If the vehicle is still having problems that were complained about during the warranty period, a valid CA Lemon Law claim may exist.
Light up the Room
One retailer offers a variety of energy-saving lighting choices at reasonable prices. With an inventory worth over $1 million of energy efficient bulbs to florescent bulbs, you would be able to pick and choose what you needed for your home or business. For a business to sell the most energy efficient lighting products, they need to be committed to their work. This is such a company and they offer an array of environmentally responsible lighting choices such as LED glow lights, CFL bulbs, LED lightbulbs, LED Christmas lights and many more energy-saving lighting choices that can be used in your business or home.
Contractor Payment Problems
The goal of these Denver construction defect litigation attorneys is to provide cost effective representation with an emphasis on practical results. They also provide advice and assistance to companies to establish basic lien compliance procedures. These construction attorneys also handle all aspects of statutory mechanic’s lien claims, construction payment claims and bond claims in the state of Colorado. The firm’s expertise in general construction litigation provides them insight into the business of construction professionals. They have represented a variety of construction professionals in both the prosecution and defense of payment claims, bond claims and mechanic’s lien actions. They also have a Denver auto accident attorney available, if needed.
