Bill requiring two people on train in Utah

My initial response is that this would likely have no teeth.  Generally this type of thing is overridden by federal law, since the RRs are governed by the interstate commerce act.  It would make a difference on a RR within the state that was completely isolated.

Agreed, if the Federal law or regulation controls this subject, then under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution states may not.

Agreed, we have a few locals, but most our rail is UP and BNSF in the state. I doubt the bill will go anywhere in Utah anyway. But it does remind us the efforts to go to a 1 person crew continue

This brings to mind the state caboose laws back in the early to mid 1980's.  The railroads were eliminating cabooses and several states (I recollect Virginia being one of them) implemented laws requiring the use of cabooses on trains operating inside the state.

 

Curt

I think the other posters are correct about federal law prevailing, for the class 1 railroads anyway. For the law itself, it seems to me having 2 people to run a train that can be 7,000 feet or more in length just makes common sense? The small town in Canada (which I can't spell the name of) might still be standing and the people killed could still be alive if that train would have had a 2 man crew? Also, as the old saying goes, 'two heads are better than one', which I think has a lot of truth to it. And people forget things, someone double checking means less things forgotten or missed too.

 

For the railroad yards, doesn't that require an engineer for the engine and then a ground mad for the switching and other things required for moving the cars around? I am not really sure how all that works? For commuter trains, I am not sure either, but it seems like maybe a couple of accidents in the last few years could have possibly been prevented there as well? Operator falling asleep or texting or whatever they have determined were some of the causes may have been able to be prevented with a second person also watching the operations of the train? 

rtr12:

 

A lot of railroad yards and many industrial rail operations utlize a single operator using a belt-pack device.  When switching cars, the operator stands on the ground using the belt-pack to control the locomotive.  The folks using this method actually believe it to be safer than having two or more people involved in the switching operation.  The guy controlling the engine is also the guy on the ground so you have no possibility of a mis-communication between the switchman and the engineer.

 

Curt

No crews are coming, not right now but in the next decade there will be crew less trains. 

Thanks, that makes sense. I have never really watched yard operations, although I live right between a couple of large BNSF yards, only a few miles from either one. Guess I need to get out more...

So was the outcome of the state laws that required cabooses? Did the class 1's ignore them or did they get them repealed?

Probably a combination of both. I was not aware that states had any control of interstate railroads, especially when the U.S. rail system is under the jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board plus the FRA.

Chris:

Now you are asking me to dig deep into the old memory vault.

The caboose laws had more to do with labor objecting to dropping them than it did safety although, safety was the rationale used by those states that had caboose laws.  Once the unions had negotiated something they deemed acceptable, the state laws quietly went away.

In terms of whether the railroads paid any attention to them, I would agree with Jack, some followed and some didn't.

Curt

With repsect to the full crew laws, in 1966 the Supreme Court decided that Congress had not legislated in that area, and in 1968 decided that the Commerce clause was not implicated.  Hence states could legally regulate:  Locomotive Firemen

 

If the Federal scheme has not changed since then the bill could be valid.

 

 

I want to correct something I posted yesterday in regard to the caboose laws.  Apparently my recollection was a bit faulty and in those instances, Google can be my friend. 

 

The caboose laws weren't enacted in the 1980's.  In fact, most had been around for quite some time.  They didn't become an issue with the railroads until the advent of end of train devices and the railroad's attempts to drop cabooses from trains. 

 

I mentioned Virginia in my post yesterday as I did remember cabooses being an issue in that state.  Virginia and Montana were among the last few states to keep caboose laws on the books.

 

And I'll tag onto what Chaos notes above.  Many states had railroad commissions that regulated the intrastate operations of railroads and trucking companies operating within the state.  Going back aways, some states (I recollect Mississippi and Texas being among them) had requirements that railroads operating in the state had to be incorporated in that state.  Without doing some research, I'm not sure when these state charter laws began to fade away.

 

Curt