I agree that a hi-vis vest does provide a safety advantage in some situations. I purposely wore a hunter orange jacket at times when I worked as a conductor and had to flag crossings for a shove. There are times that noticing an employee in the foul, you might be able to blast the horn to catch their attention, but you probably can't stop short or even want to try to swerve to miss them if you are on a train. How does it substantially provide safety for an engineer to wear one? As far as FHWA rules - who cares unless you are working on repairing roads. Railroads are under the FRA, and if every federal and state agency is allowed authority over us, we won't be able to afford to work because we will be violating some agency's rule or their inspector's interpertation of it.

The while "job briefing" issue is nothing new, it just became a catch word for formalizing the program to make someone look good. As an engineer doing switching, all I want to know is the general scope of the plan, and then Ahead, Backup or That'll do. If I am a brakeman, I don't need to know every move the conductor intends to make, because things always change. Let me know which cars to which track, and a friendly reminder of potential hazards. I was a yard conductor on a job with a 30+ year grandfathered brakeman - guess who ran the job even though I was responsible? An experienced and qualified crew that works well together can switch cars safely and efficiently often with only a minimum amount of direct communication. Watch - it won't be long before the entire train crew will have to meet each time there is even a minor change, follow a check list of items for the job briefing, and each intial the contents of the briefing.

Safety should not be just a bunch of rules and proceedures - it is an attitude that each employee needs to work safely and the company (and union) does not just enforce it, but clearly supports it. If I am the supervisor, I try to buy a variety of ear plugs, safety glasses, etc. so they are always conveient and available. The variety of PPE allows the employee to choose which best fits their needs.

The SOFA report on page 5 is interesting. Notice that all the recent job briefing proceedures have not made a difference. The inexperienced employee and industrial or close clearances remain an issue. If they really wan't to reduce injuries, let the FRA take on industry tracks. Nothing like wading through weeds, mud over broken pallets dodging trucks, forklifts and stacks of crap - but complain or refuse to switch the industry due to these hazards and see what happens. A switching contract I managed got so bad with forklifts staging the next loads the customer finally had to prohibit any of their workers from the area until we were done switching. I just didn't want forklifts next to the track we were trying to work.

There are three issues that few admit to: 1) Are the railroads providing sufficient training before "promoting" someone to engineer or conductor, and are they receiving enough OJT before being promoted? 2) Are the applicable rules themselves (federal or railroad) outdated, impractical, confusing, conflicting or being interperted inconsistently? 3) Is the railroad providing sufficient oversight? Look at the accident reports, and how many times it mentions the lack of sufficient supervision.

Oh well - my soapbox is strarting to fail.