National Academies Press: OpenBook

Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies (2013)

Chapter: Chapter Three - Survey Findings

« Previous: Chapter Two - Literature Review
Page 13
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Survey Findings ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22485.
×
Page 13
Page 14
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Survey Findings ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22485.
×
Page 14
Page 15
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Survey Findings ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22485.
×
Page 15
Page 16
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Survey Findings ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22485.
×
Page 16
Page 17
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Survey Findings ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22485.
×
Page 17

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

13 vehicles defensively in an effort to reduce risk and with a goal of zero accidents. While operating agency vehicles, all employees will . . . keep their minds focused on the task of driving. Eating, drinking, talking on a radio and with passengers distracts even the most seasoned driver. • Any activity, electronic device, or other form of com- munication not associated with an operator’s normal expected duties and tasks while on the road as outlined in the operator’s handbook, which interferes with an operator’s ability to provide 100% focus to the safe operation of his or her bus while en route, or that inter- feres with an operator’s ability to be attentive to custom- ers’ needs shall be considered a distraction. • Distracted driving is a specific type of inattention that occurs when a driver diverts attention from the driving task to focus on some other activity instead. Examples of distracted driving include texting while driving, talk- ing on a cell phone, adjusting music, distractions with children or pets, eating, drinking, checking messages, or other activities that take your focus off driving. • A distraction is anything that takes your eyes off the road ahead or your mind-focus away from your job of safety operating the bus. Eight of the agencies surveyed reported that bus operators were included in the development and/or review phases of creating their definition. Agencies were also queried about whether an assessment of the bus operators’ work environment and behavioral pat- terns was conducted to determine the full universe of dis- tracted driving hazards, contributing factors, and outcome. Twenty-five had conducted such an assessment and 21 had included representatives from the bus operator workforce in the assessment process. sTATE LAWs AND AGENCY POLICIEs Of the 20 states represented in the survey, seven have laws banning cell phone use for calls and texting while driving a motor vehicle. Nine have laws addressing only texting while driving and four have no laws restricting or prohibiting the use of cell phones by transit bus operators. Arizona has a law prohibiting cell phone use by school bus drivers and Mis- souri’s law addresses texting by drivers 21 or younger. Ohio and Florida have no laws restricting or prohibiting cell phone use and/or texting for any drivers of any age. INTRODUCTION As part of the study, an online link to a 60-question survey was sent to 39 individuals, 35 transit system representatives from operations, safety, or administration, and four local labor union officers, representing a total of 35 transit systems. Thirty- three agency representatives and three labor union officers responded (92%). As previously mentioned, the responses from the three labor union officers were very much in line with their respective management counterparts (approximately 90%); hence the universe of participants will be limited to 33. However, the follow-up interviews with the labor representa- tives did provide insightful observations and will be discussed, as appropriate, in chapter four: Case Examples. BAsIC sURVEY DATA Table 3 shows the geographical dispersal—over 20 states— of the 33 participating agencies represented by staff and local labor union officials. Agencies ranged in size from New York City Transit, which employs 12,000 bus operators, to Chitten- den County Transportation Authority in Burlington, Vermont, which provides suburban and rural fixed-route and on-demand services with 66 operators. The breakdown of services pro- vided by surveyed systems is illustrated in Figure 1. DEFINITIONs AND AssEssMENT Each system was asked if it had a definition of distracted driv- ing behaviors. All participants responded to the question, with 19 saying that they did have a definition and 14 acknowl- edging they did not. If the agency did have one, respondents were asked to provide a copy. Three submitted copies of their policies containing their definition, and eight others entered the definition into the survey. The definitions submitted in the survey are listed here: • Any non-driving activity that takes the focus away from the primary task of driving • Cell phone [use], eating, excessive conversation, texting, and [use of] electronic devices • Inattention to duty by any employee • We recreate various distractions in our simulator which the operators can experience. • The closest thing we have to this is an executive order which states: Transit employees shall operate agency chapter three sURVEY FINDINGs

14 As previously mentioned in the report, California and Massachusetts have laws specifically banning any cell phone use, hand-held or hands-free, by transit bus operators while operating a vehicle. Participants in Florida, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Washington reported that there were laws in their states prohibiting local governments—or transit sys- tems affiliated with local governments—from passing laws or creating regulations beyond what is, or, in Arizona and Florida, what is not covered in the state law. All of the systems but one had specific rules pertaining to the possession and/or use of cell phones while operating a bus, but only six of the agencies specifically prohibit opera- tors from carrying a cell phone while on duty. Twenty-one of the participating systems require an operator carrying a cell phone to have the power turned off while driving. Six agen- cies have a policy that limits or prohibits the use of hand- held phones while allowing the use of hands-free devices. Four of the participating agencies issue cell phones to their operators. Procedures for family members to contact opera- tors through the control center, in the event of an emergency, are in place in 29 of the 33 systems. Rules addressing other distracting behaviors were also included in the survey. Table 4 lists the types of behavior and the number of participating agencies that have rules prohibit- ing operators from engaging in those activities while driving a vehicle. Thirty of the 33 agencies, or 91%, also have rules that address passenger behavior and conduct that could be dis- tracting, such as attempting to question or converse with the operator while he or she is driving. All 33 systems post these rules on the bus; in some cases they are also on the agen- cy’s website and/or on printed bus maps/guides. The “first offense” penalties for violating these rules range from noth- ing to a 30-day prohibition from riding the bus. The most common are verbal warnings delivered by the operator and/ or a street supervisor. Nineteen of the agencies (58%) have instituted a formal process to measure the effectiveness of distracted driv- ing policies, incorporating, but not limited to, a reduction of distracted driving incidents, operator retention rates, and on-time performance statistics. Employee or labor union State No. of Agencies That Responded to the Survey Arizona 1 California 4 Colorado 1 Connecticut 1 Florida 4 Georgia 1 Illinois 2 Maryland 1 Massachusetts 2 Minnesota 1 Missouri 1 New York 2 North Carolina 1 Ohio 3 Oregon 1 Pennsylvania 3 Utah 1 Vermont 1 Virginia 1 Washington 1 Total 33 TABLE 3 AGENCIES PARTICIPATING IN THE PROJECT SURVEY FIGURE 1 Distribution of bus operation modes within participating agencies.

15 representatives are part of the assessment process at seven (21%) of the systems. REPORTING AND ENFORCEMENT The systems in the study use a variety of methods to report, investigate, and enforce cell phone and other distracted driv- ing behavior rules, as illustrated in Table 5. The survey identi- fied specific enforcement methods and the number of systems using each. As such, transit agencies participating in the sur- vey could be included more than once. As the table illustrates, the most common methods are the use of supervisors, passen- ger reports, and on-board cameras. “First offense” penalties for operators who violate cell phone rules range from written warnings to termination. At some agencies, these rules also include some or all other dis- tracted driving behaviors. At one participating agency, the use of any personal electronic device (PED) is considered the same as using a cell phone and therefore the penalties are the same; however, eating or drinking while operating a bus on this system is not included in the policy and so is not punished at all. At another participating system, drinking a bottle of water or cup of coffee while operating a bus is considered as egregious as talking or texting on a cell phone and is punished equally, while yet another system provides cup holders installed on their buses for the operators. Even the four systems that issue cell phones to their operators have policies and rules identifying and governing the use and mis- use of the agency-issued phones. Table 6 lists the first-offense penalties and the number of systems enforcing specific penalties. This table only cov- ers policies that specifically include cell phone use, and in some cases, possession of a phone. Each system that has a policy—32 of the 33—is included. Some of the systems use a combination of penalties, such as a written warning and a one- or five-day suspension; in those cases, the more severe penalty—a suspension as opposed to a warning—is listed. None of the systems is counted more than once. All of the 33 participating agencies have some mecha- nism with which to document and address distracted driving behaviors and activities other than cell phone use or posses- sion; these penalties tend to be much more lenient. Only two systems in the study use consistent disciplinary actions for TABLE 4 DISTRACTED DRIVING BEHAVIORS PROHIBITED BY PARTICIPATING AGENCIES Behavior/Activity: While Bus Is Moving No. of Agencies Prohibiting the Activity Use of hand-held cell phones 32 Use of hands-free cell phone 26 Use of hand-held radios 24 Eating 29 Drinking (water, coffee, soft drinks, etc.) 29 Using an MP3 player with headphones 30 Using an MP3 player without headphones 30 Having a conversation with passengers 26 TABLE 5 METHODS OF REPORTING OR ENFORCING DISTRACTED DRIVING RULES Method of Reporting or Enforcement No. of Systems Using This Method Direct street supervisors to look for distracted behavior policy violation 31 Use on-board cameras to enforce distracted driving policies 24 Use on-board cameras to investigate reports of distracted driving policy violations 27 Use stop-light and/or traffic cameras to enforce distracted driving policies 6 Use stop-light and/or traffic cameras to investigate reports of distracted driving policy violations 6 Encourage passengers to report distracted driving behaviors demonstrated by operators 26 Provide passengers with a specific contact number for reporting operators demonstrating distracted driving behaviors 29 TABLE 6 FIRST-OFFENSE PENALTIES FOR CELL PHONE RULE VIOLATIONS Cell Phone Violation First-Offense Penalty No. of Systems Written warning 8 1-day suspension 2 3-day suspension 1 5-day suspension 3 10-day suspension 2 20-day suspension 6 30-day suspension 1 Variable suspension (typically 5 to 20 days) 4 Termination 3 Other 2 Total 32

16 methods are through training programs, the issuance of new SOP manual/rule-books or revisions, and postings or bulletins. TRAINING PROGRAMs AND PROACTIVE MEAsUREs Every system in the study but one has a training program that addresses distracted driving behaviors and consequences. The training is delivered to new operators at all of the sys- tems and to existing operators at every agency but two. The chart (Figure 2) identifies the specific behaviors covered in the training programs: Of the 32 training programs, 27 (84%) discuss laws, policies, and punitive actions; all cover the real-world con- sequences such as accidents, fatalities, injuries, and exten- sive property damage. The courses came from a variety of sources: 17 (53%) customized or modified acquired programs; 10 (32%) developed its materials internally; and five (16%) use unmodified, commercially available training packages. Other agencies have taken steps to address behaviors as well as environmental factors contributing to distract driving. policies specifically addressing cell phone usage/possession and policies addressing other distracted driving activities: Both use 5-day suspensions. Several agencies classify dis- tracted driving behaviors other than cell phone use and possession as safety infractions and not as rule or policy vio- lations, leading to the implementation of less harsh penalties. The types of penalties and number of agencies that apply them for first non-cell phone violations are listed in Table 7. Each system is represented only once, and in cases where there may be a combination of interventions and/or pen- alties, the most severe penalty within that combination is identified. Many of the agencies have a progressive-discipline pro- cess that considers other rules violations and work history when determining punitive actions. All but one of the 33 systems participating in the survey also have a process for operators to explain their behaviors and/or appeal or grieve decisions. Survey responses indicate that new or revised policies regarding cell phones or distracted driving behaviors are com- municated to operators in a variety of ways. The most common TABLE 7 FIRST-OFFENSE PENALTIES FOR DISTRACTED DRIVING (NON-CELL PHONE) RULE VIOLATIONS Distracted Driving Behavior Rule Violation First-Offense Penalty No. of Systems Counseling 7 Written warning 13 5-day suspension 6 Progressive discipline 2 Other 5 Total 33 FIGURE 2 Distracted driving behaviors addressed in agency training programs.

17 geographic location. Further discussions with agencies that have taken steps to examine and modify operators’ sched- ules, duties, and work spaces would be beneficial in identify- ing the process and results for such activities. The information from the survey may also present justifi- cation for an industry-sponsored joint labor/management ini- tiative to move toward some level of standardized practices and policies for like-sized systems and services. Table 8 lists these actions and the number of systems in the study that are using them. sUMMARY Given the size of the industry sample, the data shows a wide range of policies, practices, and punitive actions in place at agencies, with no clear correlation between agency size and TABLE 8 MITIGATION ACTIONS TO ADDRESS DISTRACTED DRIVING BEHAVIORS AND CONDITIONS Mitigation Action No. of Systems Examine and/or modify schedules to allow for sufficient time during breaks to eat and use restroom facilities 30 Examine on-board duties such as fare collection, making announcements/calling stops, and communicating with passengers and the control center to identify possible modifications 24 Modify or remove one- or two-way communication or alarm devices, monitors, and other instruments from the operator’s work-space to reduce operator distractions 9 Install software or hardware on buses to interrupt/prevent cell phone signal transmission 0 Employ intervention or assistance programs for first-time violators, if allowed by law 18

Next: Chapter Four - Case Examples »
Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Synthesis 108: Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies is designed to help transit agencies develop policies and programs to address and prevent distracted driving incidents.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!