OPB wrote: "It would probably be much more effective at preventing accidents, to ensure adequate time off and rest between reasonable length work shifts."

Yep! In fact, the original draft of the crew rest initiative of the Railway Safety Act (RSIA) included clear language providing for a ten (10) hour call for work. This would put the crews on notice that they will be on duty ten hours from the time they take the call.

The obvious advantage to this is planning one's rest, but the railroads succesfully lobbied that part out of the RSIA, most likely due to the fact that after over 125 years of railroading, and with all the latest and greatest college wiz kids and their cute little computer programs, they still can't plan their way out of a stub track. We still only get the same call process that has been in place for generations.

Here's another cute little game the railroads play: Deadhead to the Away From Home Terminal to get rested to work back. Basically, you take your call to be on duty in 90 minutes to van over to the AFHT, then sit there for at least 10 more hours getting rested.

Sounds fair, right? The reality is this: 99% of the time if you take that call, it means you were first out and rested at your home terminal. So, after a full rest period at home, you get in a van and go to a hotel room in the morning and sit there doing whatever (Drink? Watch TV all day?) for another 10-12 hours before you go back on duty to work back home.

Of course, since you were already rested, you're not tired enough to get more rest at the AFHT, and so by the time you finally do get called to work back, your body is naturally tired from being up all day, and it needs sleep. Too bad! Your ass is on the Key Train for the next 10-12 hours! Good luck!