Eastern Railroad Discussion > NS Crews: Don't Mess With the Cameras!

To all those in the employ of NS in T&E service:

Recently, my LC was called in to represent a member who was being accused of sabotaging one of the new onboard video cameras in the GE Dash 9's. These cameras, located in the top left corner of the engineer's front window, are intended to record the right-of-way in front of the train as evidence should a trespasser or grade crossing incident occur. The digital recording software also records any pertinent information (speed, etc), and a microphone also records the sound of the horn and bell.

In the course of the investigation, the BLE has discovered that this recording system contains a feature where unplugging any of the wires (for the mic, camera, etc) causes the recording equipment to note the exact time that the plug was removed. In other words, tamper with a camera or mic by unplugging the connectors, and the company will have the exact day and time on record. It has also been discovered, and I stress this point, that the MICROPHONE'S LOCATION IS SUCH THAT THE VOICES INSIDE THE CAB CAN BE HEARD AND RECORDED.

Now, nobody likes to have the conversations recorded surreptitiously, but we are advising all of our members to NOT TAMPER WITH THE CAMERAS OR MICROPHONES. We are also advising our members to check the condition of the plugs at beginning and end of their shift, as well as throughout... especially if anybody other than the crew boarded the power (as the plugs are accessible to anyone who travels through the nose section of the unit). It is far more difficult for the carrier to remove a crew from service for an in-cab conversation, no matter what the content, than it is to terminate someone for tampering with equipment. If one is ruled guilty of doing the latter, it is very likely that they'll be put out on the street permanently and will find it very hard to find RR employment again.

In the wake of the investigation my LC was involved with, the company has gone back and allegedly found two more locomotives where the camera or mic suddenly stopped working when the employee in question was assigned to the units. Since your locomotives are recorded as part of your electronic timecard process, it is easy for the company to trace a unit back to your shift.

These cameras can be one of your biggest allies if you are involved in a trespasser or grade crossing incident. They can be your biggest enemy if someone tampers with the equipment. The BLE International is being alerted to the recording of in cab conversations, and the open accessibilty of the plugs (which should be internal or contained within a locked cabinet to avoid an innocent party being set up). I assume they will address those issues directly with the NS. I would suspect, however, based on the recent recommendation of a government agency, that in cab voice recorders (much like the cockpit voice recorders used on airliners) aren't far down the road.

As we tell our guys... CYOA, and you've got little to worry about. Try to avoid being recorded by unplugging the microphone, and the resulting silence on the digital recording may get you fired permanently...

Sad.

More trains get delayed when crews refuse to operate units which have inoperable cameras. Gotta turn the power, or reassemble the consist.

You know, NS could have achieved the tresspasser/grade crossing proof without the cab conversation recording element. Instead of a tool that just defends the company in a lawsuit, the tool goes further and generates a labor issue to the extent that sabotage is warranted to stop the infringement.

NS could have placed the microphone so as to pick up the horn and bell, but without recording cab conversations. Instead, they chose the stupid thing to do. Recording the cab conversations is not necessarly a critical thing to do in order for the company to defend itself in a lawsuit.

I guess we shouldn't expect more from a company thats run by a lawyer.

Will this ingenuity laced with stupidity ever end?

Sidewinder wrote:

> NS could have placed the microphone so as to pick up the horn
> and bell, but without recording cab conversations. Instead,
> they chose the stupid thing to do. Recording the cab
> conversations is not necessarly a critical thing to do in order
> for the company to defend itself in a lawsuit.
>
> I guess we shouldn't expect more from a company thats run by a
> lawyer.

Give them a break. The first thing a plantiff's attorney in a lawsuit would ask is why didn't you set things up to record cab conversations so that we could see whether the crew was paying attention.

Unfortuantely all of this is just a sign of the times we live in.

So what is the problem with recording things said in the cab. I believe that this has been done at the airlines for many years without much complaint from the crews.

ts1457 wrote:

> Give them a break. The first thing a plantiff's attorney in a
> lawsuit would ask is why didn't you set things up to record cab
> conversations so that we could see whether the crew was paying
> attention.


The crew attention factor is very black or white issue. It does not have any gray area. If the horn is blowing (as recorded), the crew is obviously paying attention. I mean, what else can the crew do?

Because airline pilots are treated like professionals and railroaders are treated like S*** by the management. If the horn was blowing 20 seconds before hitting the crossing thats all the proof needed of whether the crew was paying attention. We really need cameras and microphones in the automobiles to see if THAT person was paying attention. Besides there is a big difference bwtween moving 300 people in a 30 million dollar aircraft with a potential to hit 300 more people in another aircraft, and a coal train with two people on it hitting and killing a family of four on a grade crossing.

I believe the badwill created by this policy will cause more damage to the company over the long run then the lawsuits that it might win.

In NJ, it's illegal to record a conversation without the consent of the persons in the conversation, absent a court order. Even if you have domestic help (baby sitter) you've got to notify them they are being recorded or videotaped. And, you can't do it where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists (such as a bathroom, bedroom, etc).

Personally, I think this is another example of the company over reaching and the BLE failing to protect its members' interests. if the company had any fear of the union, they would have laid it out, discussed it, looked at the alternatives, and then done the whole deal out in the open. The fact the company didn't feel a need to do that says a lot...

Just substitute Teamsters for BLE, and drivers for engineers and see if that sentence still makes sense!

Lackawanna484 wrote:
>
> Personally, I think this is another example of the company over
> reaching and the BLE failing to protect its members' interests.
> if the company had any fear of the union, they would have laid
> it out, discussed it, looked at the alternatives, and then done
> the whole deal out in the open. The fact the company didn't
> feel a need to do that says a lot...
>

Part of the problem lies in the fact that the NS told the unions that the microphones were only intended to record the sound of the horn and bell, and were to be located in an area that would not pick up conversations in the cab. Somewhere along the line, the company forgot about that promise and, if one traces the microphone wire, the mics will now be found in an area of the lower nose area. Seemingly not by accident, they are aimed directly toward the area occupied by the crew... which certainly doesn't support NS claims of "horn and bell only" as it's often tough to hear the bell in the cab of a moving Dash 9 when the windows are closed (except for the new electronic bells, which are considerably louder).

Having been privvy to what's on a downloaded video recording, there's no real need for the audio portion anyway, as the horn and bell show up with a visual indicator on the recording.

Seems to me the NS may not have been on the up and up with their intentions...

rickrailrd wrote:
>
> Besides there is a
> big difference bwtween moving 300 people in a 30 million dollar
> aircraft with a potential to hit 300 more people in another
> aircraft, and a coal train with two people on it hitting and
> killing a family of four on a grade crossing.
>
>

Similar to Tim McVey's idea of "collateral damage." Try telling your argument to the family/friends devasted by the loss of 1 individual, let alone 4.

I think that another reason that they are recording the crew is in case of a xing accident where both crew members are killed or incapacitated for some reason. In todays times of legal litigation you never know......

Lackawanna484 wrote:
>
> In NJ, it's illegal to record a conversation without the
> consent of the persons in the conversation, absent a court
> order. Even if you have domestic help (baby sitter) you've got
> to notify them they are being recorded or videotaped.


The company owns the facilities and they can record you. Almost every stockbroker, trader and everyone else in my business, for example, is taped, so that, in the event a dispute, the tapes can be pulled and examined as to who said what to whom. That the conversation is recorded is part of the employment deal...you work here, we can record you. Heck, call your bank and you'll get a taped message while you're on hold saying the call may be monitored....same thing.

Further, companies can and do, legally, study what internet sites you visit from office computers. Don't like it? Get another job.


484 went on:

And, you
> can't do it where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists
> (such as a bathroom, bedroom, etc).


In a locomotive cab, I would think there is no expectation of privacy.
As I said above, don't want to be recorded? Tough. The company owns the equipment and if they want to record, they're going to record. You could try suing, but you'll lose.

BobE

doesn't the tape they download pretty much tell if the horn and bell were activated. Why don't they put a camera inside the cab to see if the crew is paying attention. It's amazing how many trains leave the tracks just to hit that car and then jump back on the tracks. Next thing they'll put the camera in the John to see if you are using to much paper to wipe. Gotta keep the cost down we have you on tape using 2" of paper that wasn't soiled. Do you know what this is doing to our overhead. Sheesh we put in chemical toilets to please you guys and this is the thanks we get. :)

BobE, both you and I have taped phone lines, it's part of the deal. And, we both know it, because we were told the line is setup for taping. And, it beeps (or at least mine does, which may also be part of the law). But, I'd be very surprised if your office conversations with coworkers are being taped.

I know the NJ reg on household help is very real. They have to be notified, and there are already a few cases where damages have been awarded resulting from invasion of (the help's) privacy in the employer's home. Moms installing webcams to watch the babysitter, etc.

But, the issue is engineers were not told they were being taped, and they had a reasonable exectation of privacy. Hell, even the NJ State troopers were delivered a formal letter that the new videotape equipment would run only when the overhead lights were activated. Obvious, but the letter of the law.

I wonder if the audio track of the tape picks up sounds from the toilet? In NJ, that could be a violation. Or discussions of union business?

If folks wanted to make a real issue of this, there are lots of ways they could rub it in...

Paul

railtrekker wrote:
>
> doesn't the tape they download pretty much tell if the horn and
> bell were activated. Why don't they put a camera inside the cab
> to see if the crew is paying attention.

Yes, the event recorder does keep track of that info. The original intent behind the cameras, and nearly every engineer I've talked to has no problem with that purpose, was to record an unfortunate trespasser/grade crossing incident so that if the party (or their estate) files legal action, another form of evidence is available to support the information from the event recorder. If someone manages to survive, then comes into court and tries to claim the gates weren't working, they didn't hear the horn, etcetera... and the company brings in a video recording SHOWING the dummy going out of their way to avoid the warning devices, it can save them a lot of money from an undeserved settlement.

Furthermore, since the crew is often named separately in a lawsuit, it benefits them to have a video recording of the incident to support their statement (provided they are doing their job as they should). Lawyers will go to extreme lengths to win a settlement against the RR. In one case that I heard of involving CSX, it took over a year for the legal counsel of the person killed at a crossing to find evidence to use against the crew. Want to know what they eventually found? A videotape from a child's birthday party several blocks from the crossing where the event took place. The family just happend to be outside videotaping the party at the same time as the grade crossing collision. No train was seen, but the sound of the horn, including a series of frantic blasts, was heard in the audio portion. Sirens were heard several minutes later. The lawyers involved in the case timed the horn sequence from the start to when it ended, then went out and measured the distance from the whistle post to the crossing. What was their finding? That the crew did not start blowing the horn until a considerable distance past the whistle post. Since the crew did not start blowing the horn at the point mandated by FRA regs, the company was found negligible and the suriving family awarded some big bucks.

Now, if the crew could have come into court with their own video recording, one that showed the horn being sounded at the whistle post, and the car driving around the gate, that court outcome could have been radically different.

Again, the cameras aren't the problem. It's the fact that the microphones were installed inside the cab, and are being used to record crews without prior notice, that is the issue. Tell us we're being recorded... and use the download information only for its intended purpose, and there will probably be few objections....

runs4ns how long is the loop on the tape, or has the ns said? and we all know that a rr will not use the audio for unintended purposes. for those of you believe this i have swamp land in arizona to sell cheap.

If this equipment is like what we now have installed on city transit buses, it is entirely digital and can hold several hours of recorded material before "over-recording." On our buses we can press a button to "hold and save" a portion of the recording. Example: If an incident occurs on the bus involving a traffic accident or passenger incident, the driver can press this button and a significant portion of the recording before and after the incident will be permanently saved until downloaded electronically. The images are amazingly clear, all sounds are included, and in this tort-crazy country it is absolutely necessary since there are so many ambulance-chasing scuzzbag lawyers looking to hit on a public agency (or a big railroad company).

Older systems used common VHS tape and could store 4 hours of recording. NS is covering its own butt with this equipment but should not have tried to mislead its operating employees about it if, indeed it was their intention to mislead. A little communication in written form would go a long way to avoid this situation, and most big railroads aren't too good at informing their employees of anything.

IIRC, the digital recording equipment (no tape) goes back at least 48 hours, possibly longer (which I would tend to believe considering the company is able to trace back and find when a piece of the equipment failed to function properly).

Information is stored in the video box on a removable computer disk, which can be removed and the contents transferred over to a blank CD-R within minutes if the necessary hardware if readily available. From there, the images can be viewed on any computer set up to play video media.

I dont know about the video systems, but I do know a few things about the existing event recorders. The ones that we use on all of our locomotives can record up to 187 different devices/parameters (speed, throttle position, headlight setting, brake valve position, etc.). They will hold about 15 days in memory. Several engineers have found themselves in trouble when the equipment was downloaded for other reasons, and upon looking further back, other things were found (speeding, etc.).

Now, in regards to the issue of voice recorders, and recorders in general. Often, reference is made to the fact that aircraft have both event and voice recorders, and so trains should also. What is left out is that aircraft recorders are not regularly downloaded and reviewed by management. Aircraft even recorders are only inspected following an incident. Railroad event recorders are downloaded and reviewed on a random basis. Employees are then subject to discpline for infractions that may be discovered. I have no probelm with an event recorder on my locomotive, and it does help to prove your case sometimes, in grade crossing accidents and more. A voice recorder, however, that can be randomly reviewed and dowloaded by management is a bad idea. It will allow management to eavesdrop on employees who may be saying less than flattering things about said management. This can result in retrobution by management, in the same way that it occurs now, only more frequently. If, however, the voice recorder was to be installed so that only after an accident could NTSB or FRA officials investigating the accident access it, I would support it.

Finally, if NS is recording crew conversations without their knowledge, regardless of whose property it is, they are violating the privacy of those persons. They should be informed that they are being recorded, so that they can protect their rights as employees, something NS seems to frown upon.

Sirsonic wrote:
>
>
> Finally, if NS is recording crew conversations without their
> knowledge, regardless of whose property it is, they are
> violating the privacy of those persons.


Two words: ka ka. You know they are recording because you are in the locomotive and the locomotive is equipped with recording devices. If you don't know, it's because you're ignorant not because you haven't been informed.




They should be
> informed that they are being recorded, so that they can protect
> their rights as employees, something NS seems to frown upon.



You have very few rights as employees, save the obligation to work hard for the people who puts meals on your family's table. If you were to study employment law even slightly you would know this---and I suggest a review of cnn.com/law as a starter---employers have enormous latitude as to what is permissible on the property and in the premises. If you say something negative about a company you work for on an internet bulletin board, for example, the company can find you out and discipline you for it. Think I'm wrong? Ask the folks at AOL and Yahoo who work in the legal area about the subpoenas they get for disclosure of information after someone says something nasty on a stock chat BBS.

BobE

rickrailrd wrote:

> Besides there is a big difference bwtween moving 300 people in a 30 million dollar aircraft with a potential to hit 300 more people in another aircraft, and a coal train with two people on it hitting and
killing a family of four on a grade crossing.

A statement indicative of a professional? Hardly. I have to agree with BobE, many a perceived "rights" are left at home when you go to work, union or non-union. Working for any company is not a "right", but a "privledge". Last time I checked, the RR industry provides a fairly decent living. You can weigh the benefits vs. the liabilities, and you may come to the conclusion, as I have on an occasion or two, " I've been thrown out of better places than this", or decide to suck it up and do your job.