Rule G

Where I worked (city government), to get employees to not consume alcohol they paid them "Stand-by" pay. Typically, they were week long periods, shared over 4 to 8 week intervals. (I have no knowledge of how railroads handle this.)

Isn't there also the caveat of "while subject to duty"?  

N&W Class J posted:

Isn't there also the caveat of "while subject to duty"?  

That is probably the more correct term than on call, I think.  But then I am not a real RRer, just an armchair book and OGR reader RRer.

ns was no acohol while while on duty and it was a 0 talerance plus ramdon testing

Well I can do whatever I want when I'm on call, BUT... I have to be able to pass breath and urnine test when I show up to work. Guess I better be laidoffsick before I have a few beers 

In aviation, we pilots have to comply with the rule which says, "8 hours bottle to throttle." Since I never touch the stuff, it hasn't been a problem for me.

Laidoffsick's answer is the right one. On the railroad you could be tested the moment you report for work. You had better be sober at that point in time.

When I drove airplanes for a living I always thought the rule was "no smoking within the last 24 hours and no drinking within 50 foot of the plane."

Laidoffsick posted:

Well I can do whatever I want when I'm on call, BUT... I have to be able to pass breath and urnine test when I show up to work. Guess I better be laidoffsick before I have a few beers 

That's exactly what the requirement is.  The railroad has no say in its employees' off-duty activities, but "Rule G" requires that, when employees report for duty, they be free of the influence of drugs or the presence of alcohol.  (Note the difference in the drugs vs alcohol.)

Some Engineers and Conductors who work 300-plus-mile run-through freight pools often have two days off between trips.  So, if a Conductor arrives home from a trip and wants to have a couple of beers, that should be no problem.  However, the further into his rest cycle, the more risky it is to consume an alcoholic beverage.  Many of these run-through agreements permit an employee to "FOB", that is, he can request to be placed at the foot of the list of pool Conductors available at his home terminal.  So, a Conductor who checks the board and sees that he's five times out (5th one to be called) could very quickly move up to first out if the 4 ahead of him FOB to avoid going to work in a storm or on Super Bowl Sunday (or if they have recently had a drink).  Employees can only FOB once during each home layover.  So, a Conductor finding himself suddenly first out can either choose to join the FOB brigade or take the call.  If he FOBed once already, then he has to take the call.  Missing the call, whether accidental or intentional, is grounds for discipline, and therefore that's not the answer.

Back in the day, officials knew who drank and who didn't, and who the hard core alcoholics were.  Before mandatory drug and alcohol testing became law, the accepted test was the presence of the smell of alcohol on the breath, as witnessed by an official.  I always watched the ones who were known drinkers.  A couple of times, another employee came to me about being unwilling to work with somebody on his crew coming on duty in no condition to work.  Both times, I told the crew office to lay that crew member off and call another employee, and then I drove the employee home and told him that this was a one-time favor and that he should not expect it again.  One of them we later fired, the other never gave us any more trouble.

Today, there's no discretion.  An employee discovered to be in violation of "Rule G" by smelling of alcohol has to be tested.  A couple of employees in that position ran out the door and disappeared into the night while waiting for the drug and alcohol Collector to arrive.  That's the same as failing the test, as is refusal to take the test.

The tolerance for drugs is absolute zero.  The assumption is that any drugs can influence the behavior.  With alcohol, it's not actually zero on the test results.  The test is deemed to have a margin of error at results below 2%, and there is some naturally-produced body chemistry in some people that can show up as a small amount of alcohol when tested by urinalysis.  So those tests are disregarded and considered as having been passed.  However, if the test shows 2% or above, the employee has violated Federal law and Rule G, is withheld from service, and is handled as required by law and by the drug and alcohol policies of the railroad.  His Conductor or Engineer Certificate is also suspended pending the outcome and during any Federally mandated period of days.  Random testing and testing for cause (minor derailment, signal violation, employee injured on duty, etc.) are done by urine collection.  Federal Post-Accident mandatory Toxicology testing* also requires drawing blood.

Bottom line, it's not a good idea to consume an alcoholic beverage if there is any likelihood of reporting for duty within the next 4 to 6 hours, or 8 hours for two drinks.  Even someone with a sterling record who guesses wrong and happens to be random tested will be treated the same as a secret drinker who often reports for duty with 3 or 4 % alcohol in his blood and doesn't show it.  It's not worth it to have a drug and alcohol violation on your record.  It can make trouble even years later.  Plaintiff attorneys for careless drivers who run around gates and are struck by trains consider it a gold mine when any crew member has this on his record even in the distant past.  Juries are often influenced by this.  It's always a black mark.  Always.  Forever.

*  The   FRA or NTSB"Tox-Box" is only used as prescribed by law.  We ran 90 trains a day through Amarillo, and our Tox-Box went several years between uses.  Examples of events requiring toxicology testing are:  employee killed on duty, train collision meeting a very large damage threshold, certain passenger train accidents, etc.  Drivers killed at road crossings or pedestrian trespassers are not included.  Local police are never allowed to independently administer drug or alcohol tests to railroad employees on duty, as this is covered exclusively by Federal regulations.  All railroad employee testing is conducted by the railroad, using Federally mandated or approved collectors, and following detailed processes.

The previous post is a very well written and easily understood explanation of the rules.

Thanks - AGAIN - Tom!

Yes, Doug-SR is right for NS.  I remember showing up for work and seeing the drug testing trailer there many times.  When NS says random testing they mean it and they DO it.  I have heard stories of guys getting tested and sent home because they may have used a cold syrup or mouthwash with alcohol in it and tested positive.

Rick

I remember hearing from a crew friend that poppy seed items were verboten because it read the same as opiates.  Is that still true or have testing able to distinguish between poppy bun and the real drug?

Glad, like Rich, I am a teetotaler, except for Thanksgiving and Christmas dinner half wine glass.  Bad experience with A Budweiser at college (maybe allergic to an ingredient) has kept me sober for 50+ years!

RICKC posted:

I have heard stories of guys getting tested and sent home because they may have used a cold syrup or mouthwash with alcohol in it and tested positive.

Rick

Oldest alibi in the book, Rick.  Nobody on the railroad is that fastidious just because they might have bad breath.  There are breath mints and chewing gum for that condition.  Mouthwash is for use at bedtime, in the morning, and just before a big date.  Drunks always carry mouthwash or Ny-Quil in their grips.  There is a process for this.  If the employee smells like mouthwash, you test him, and then furnish him pure water and witness him repeatedly rinsing his mouth out (I can't remember the quantity that is specified, but he has to use quite a bit of water), and then you re-test him.  If he does not smell of the cover-up, then there is no hope for him if he tests positive.   Ny-Quil is included in the rule, as it specifies no medications which could affect alertness.  The alibi does not work . . . except . . .There is a place on the form filled out by the employee to note that he was taking a prescribed medication, and, if he tests positive, the railroad Medical Department will investigate and their decision will govern.

Division officials are subject to the same testing as crews.  Once, I was home with an abscessed tooth and my cheek was so tender that I couldn't have even touched it with a powder puff.  I had been to the dentist and he was treating me with antibiotics and some really good opiate pain killer - top drawer stuff.   My boss (who knew I was staying home and why) called me and informed me that my name had been randomly selected for drug testing.  I had to be driven down to the office and be tested that day.  When the lab ran the tests on my urine, the opiates were detected, and I got a call from the railroad's Chief Medical Officer who personally handled all positive tests for officials.  I told him about my condition.  He asked for the drug names, prescription numbers, and the name of the prescribing dentist.  In about an hour, he called me back and thanked me, while getting my assurance that I would not go back to work until 24 hours after the last dose of pain medication.  And that was the end of it.

Ny-quil is not the answer.  

In 20 years so far I have seen several guys get popped for a Rule G, and several guys get terminated after their 2nd Rule G. Every excuse you could possibly imagine was attempted, and some were even lucky enough to pass the tests years ago due to some shady techniques. I've got some stories for those  Policies and procedures have changed over the years, even the maximum amount of water you can drink for the urine test (ask me how I know that one), but the bottom line is...if you want to continue your career, just don't show up to work under the influence, including prescription medications. You will get fired, and you won't come back.  

Lets say you report to work and your fellow employee is "loaded".. Now you're in a real bind. You only have  a couple of choices.  Get him to book sick and take a cab home or turn him in... Unfortunately even though you may not drink and you're caught out on the road, you're the ones that ;s  going to get fired because you know better and the guy that has a drinking problem gets another chance.(again)

Laidoffsick posted:

but the bottom line is...if you want to continue your career, just don't show up to work under the influence, including prescription medications. You will get fired, and you won't come back.  

Does getting fired (always bad) for rule G "travel with you" if you want to hire on another line, minor or major?  I assume new line would ask and check about if you violated rule G, which of course I imagine is hiring kiss of death for conductor/engineer work.

Oh yeah, it will follow you. The guys that I knew personally were given the option of resigning before they were terminated.

Even if you get a DUI on your own time, you have to report it the the RR. Don't let them find out on their own when you have to recert, and submit your DMV records

Gregg posted:

Lets say you report to work and your fellow employee is "loaded".. Now you're in a real bind.

been there done that too...a few times. I'll will just say that I had a little "chat" with my co-workers and it all worked out, but I did ALL the work that shift and just put them to bed   Like Tom said, we all knew that a couple of these guys had a problem, and a couple of them ended up getting fired for good anyway. 

I read this from the start and right away I thought, "If you're on call, that means you could be called to go work at any moment." So with that logic, when/if that 'any moment' comes, you clearly shouldn't be drunk, otherwise what would be the purpose of being on call if you can't come do the job if the RR actually calls you to come in?

So true Lee. You can be first out all day and night and the phone don't ring. You sit at home all day waiting for the phone to ring, and know as soon as you leave the house... the crew office will call.

You can be 10 times out and think you got all day to run some errands, have a beer whatever.... as soon as you decide to do something, the phone rings.

being on call is a way of life, and definitely not for everyone. I haven't been on call for YEARS....not my thing. I either stay in the yard with regular hours, or work an assigned job with regular hours and days off. Most of the on call "lifers" that I know are either addicted to the money at this point, or don't want to be at home for various reasons. Although many locations across the system don't have regular assignments, it's on call pool jobs only. Being in Southern CA, I have a lot of options.

Drug testing is not just for train crews, but for all departments. They show no mercy, and show up unannounced for officials. I can not count the times I was tested. Never any warning, but it did not matter to me. The tester use to come in and say, I know it is a waste of time, but you are up again! Seen a few go home, and a few who we had to call rides for. Some wives were not happy.

Interesting conversation.  Today, one does not need to ingest alcohol except as a solvent base for some prescription cough medicines.

Interesting link to a Washington Post article detailing an increase in drug and alcohol use by railroad employees:

https://www.washingtonpost.com...e0dd91dc7_story.html

Regards,

Jerry

Gene posted:

Drug testing is not just for train crews, but for all departments. They show no mercy, and show up unannounced for officials. I can not count the times I was tested. Never any warning, but it did not matter to me.

In the Army, I got drug tested countless times, usually when we showed up for PT in the mornings. The only annoying part was that I rarely drank much water before going to PT because you never want to have to pee at a time like that. So, I'd show up with an empty bladder and start from scratch. I was often the last to give a sample because it takes a while. If only they'd had Mountain Dew around, that stuff works for me like beer works for a lot of people.

We had to do testing on an even time period, but nobody was supposed to know who would be tested as most of the time it was just a % of the people. When I was Company Commander, we had a set of gaming dice, one was used for which number from the SSNs we'd pick, then another for the 0-9 # in that spot that was picked. So, in those cases I'd know the evening before and if it were mine (and it only happened once like that), I'd know to show up hydrated so I could get to work.

I never turned up hot on a test because I've never used drugs. I rarely ever drink, and never to excess, because I hate the 'out of control' feeling that so many people crave. Frankly, I've never understood the pull of that feeling, but I guess it's a good thing I just don't understand it.

gnnpnut posted:

Interesting link to a Washington Post article detailing an increase in drug and alcohol use by railroad employees:

https://www.washingtonpost.com...e0dd91dc7_story.html

Regards,

Jerry

I am not the least bit happy to "amen" this post, but in casual conversations with today's railroad men they alude to this situation of crewmen being "altered" on duty. It must be more prevalent than it used to be when I was marked up. Even though I am reluctant to post this because I am not " in the cab" in present day to see it myself, it seems to me that those of us in our community should be aware of it.

It is the "old fogey" in me that continues to say futilely that anything less than a 3 man crew is a recipe for trouble over the road. There seemed to be a greater sense of accountability (and safety) with more crewmen.