Western Railroad Discussion > Arkansas & Missouri - former engineer's lawsuit

The July 19 2017 USA Today has a brief news items that says a former engineer is suing the railroad for unsafe work conditions. He was injured in a wreck in 2014. USA Today cites the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette as source.

The engineer's lawyer lays out a difficult case.

The injured engineer was driving a work train sent to help a stalled passenger train. The lawyer acknowledges that the train was traveling too fast for the wet and leaf covered track. The relief train crashed into the stalled train.

http://m.nwaonline.com/news/2017/jul/15/hurt-ex-engineer-s-suit-calls-railroad-/

Posted from Android

Wow, seriously?

I really really want to comment my true thoughts on this.
Posted from Android



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/17 16:09 by jointauthority.

What am I missing? The engineer that was going too fast and rammed the passenger train causing injuries to himself and others is suing his former employer?
I mean, did the A&M order the engineer to go too fast?
Why don't they check there brakes (and radios) before departing the yard? Seems like all he had to know was what milepost location the stalled train was at.
Again, what am I missing here?

According to the lawsuit, Buehne suffered head and knee injuries and has post-traumatic stress disorder.

Buehne was the engineer on the rescue train that hit the stalled passenger train head-on. All 39 passengers and four members of the crew from the two trains were taken to hospitals.

I usually don't side with management on safety issues but I'll make an exception here if the article is accurate. This guy sounds like a dunce and his greedy lawyer (yes some are, lol)should be sued for HIS stupidity. Claiming PTSD is a slap in the face to vets who are dealing with the real thing... Hope the A&M goes after this jerk....

partsguy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> According to the lawsuit, Buehne suffered head and
> knee injuries and has post-traumatic stress
> disorder.
>
> Buehne was the engineer on the rescue train that
> hit the stalled passenger train head-on. All 39
> passengers and four members of the crew from the
> two trains were taken to hospitals.
>
> I usually don't side with management on safety
> issues but I'll make an exception here if the
> article is accurate. This guy sounds like a dunce
> and his greedy lawyer (yes some are, lol)should be
> sued for HIS stupidity. Claiming PTSD is a slap
> in the face to vets who are dealing with the real
> thing... Hope the A&M goes after this jerk....

Thanks, beat me to it. I fully agree with you assessment. The so called "Engineer" should have faced charges himself. What an idiot.

In some places, juries look at the results of an incident. The injuries, pain, etc.

Not the poor decisions which may have caused or contributed to the injuries.

With 39 passengers and several crew, this could have been a disaster.

Posted from Android

Don't be surprised if A&M starts assuming the same attitude toward passenger trains that Genesee & Wyoming does.

The less trains you have out on the road (passenger OR freight), the less chance there is for a collision, injuries and lawsuits.

PTSD is NOT just a military thing. Cops, firefighters and victims of violant crimes can and do get it too.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PTSD is NOT just a military thing. Cops,
> firefighters and victims of violant crimes can and
> do get it too.

Yes, many years after my father passed, we came to the realization that he died as a product of PTSD. Six year with the Army Air Corps that included four years of WWII in Hawaii and Guadal Canal gave him serious medical issues and a deadly cigarette addiction. It took a while, but it finally was his undoing. And of course it is an unrecognized problem for all vets, military, law, and many others.

Rob

Cigarettes probably killed as many GIs as the enemy. They were still passing them out to us in the late 1950s.

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

For the non-railroaders on TO who want to understand why employees are always bringing lawsuits against their RR employers you really should read this:

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/blogs/frank-n-wilner/fela-durable-and-still-going.html

Its about the best summary of the history and possible future of FELA (Federal Employers Liability Act) that I have read anywhere.

HotWater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> partsguy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > According to the lawsuit, Buehne suffered head
> and
> > knee injuries and has post-traumatic stress
> > disorder.
> >
> > Buehne was the engineer on the rescue train
> that
> > hit the stalled passenger train head-on. All 39
> > passengers and four members of the crew from
> the
> > two trains were taken to hospitals.
> >
> > I usually don't side with management on safety
> > issues but I'll make an exception here if the
> > article is accurate. This guy sounds like a
> dunce
> > and his greedy lawyer (yes some are, lol)should
> be
> > sued for HIS stupidity. Claiming PTSD is a
> slap
> > in the face to vets who are dealing with the
> real
> > thing... Hope the A&M goes after this jerk....
>
> Thanks, beat me to it. I fully agree with you
> assessment. The so called "Engineer" should have
> faced charges himself. What an idiot.

Amen. There are some people that are promoted to engineer that have no business being in the seat. I don't have a horse in this race, but on the face of it, it seems like this guy is one of them.

mns019 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For the non-railroaders on TO who want to understand why employees are always bringing lawsuits against their RR employers you really
> should read this:
>
> http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/blogs/frank-n-wilner/fela-durable-and-still-going.html
>
> Its about the best summary of the history and possible future of FELA (Federal Employers Liability Act) that I have read anywhere.

Obviously, that's a very biased article, coming from a railroad industry trade magazine.

Next up, let's ask Kim Jong-un what he thinks of the future of capitalism.

There are some states where Workmen's Compensation payouts are so paltry that they don't even cover burial expenses for an employee killed on the job.

Is that the "model" that we should be shooting for?

One way to measure how FELA is good for the working man is by measuring how desperately the Industry wants to scrap it.

Instead of scrapping FELA, let's scrap Workmen's Compensation and get THOSE employees covered by something similar to FELA.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/17 21:43 by CA_Sou_MA_Agent.

Yes the article was in a railway trade magazine, however Frank Wilner, the author has a long history of involvement in the rail industry from a regulatory (ICC, STB), industry (AAR) and labor (UTU) perspective. Mr. Wilner most recently served as head of PR for the UTU. He is by no means an apologist for management he is widely regarded as a scholar of railroading.

CA_Sou_MA_Agent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Obviously, that's a very biased article, coming from a railroad industry trade magazine.

Frank Wilner is about the least biased guy around, when it comes to labor-management conflict in the industry. He's worked for the unions (UTU), railroads (AAR) and the government (STB), giving him a balanced view. Railway Age has had a "Lines on Labor" or similar column for a long time, and it's usually been free of bias as long as I've been reading it.

I'm glad I was sitting down when I read this. Being "operating" (retired) I'm generally not pro-management in injury issues but this one is unbelievable and I hope the railroad wins this one - this is ridiculous!

How can the railroad be liable for not maintaining a safe work environment when the employee himself 100% caused the accident through his own actions? Quite frankly he should have been operating at restricted speed, which simply put requires being able to stop within one-half the range of vision. That also requires the engineer to take conditions into account and operate accordingly. The fact he hit the train indicates he failed miserably in operating at restricted speed - and now he wants to blame the railroad!!!

Was the train stalled on the main in this dark territory properly protected? === === = === JLH

illini73 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CA_Sou_MA_Agent Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Obviously, that's a very biased article, coming
> from a railroad industry trade magazine.
>
> Frank Wilner is about the least biased guy around,
> when it comes to labor-management conflict in the
> industry. He's worked for the unions (UTU),
> railroads (AAR) and the government (STB), giving
> him a balanced view. Railway Age has had a "Lines
> on Labor" or similar column for a long time, and
> it's usually been free of bias as long as I've
> been reading it.


Frank Wilner is the champion for whoever is currently signing his paycheck.

I think everyone is missing the engineer's obvious argument.

He was operating his train unsafely. A&M hired him to operate his train. Therefore, it is A&M's fault that his train was being operated unsafely.

[Preceding post was about 50% sarcasm]


Railbaron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm glad I was sitting down when I read this.
> Being "operating" (retired) I'm generally not
> pro-management in injury issues but this one is
> unbelievable and I hope the railroad wins this one
> - this is ridiculous!
>
> How can the railroad be liable for not maintaining
> a safe work environment when the employee himself
> 100% caused the accident through his own actions?
> Quite frankly he should have been operating at
> restricted speed, which simply put requires being
> able to stop within one-half the range of vision.
> That also requires the engineer to take conditions
> into account and operate accordingly. The fact he
> hit the train indicates he failed miserably in
> operating at restricted speed - and now he wants
> to blame the railroad!!!