Substance Abuse

[Hanno]

It appears as though Amtrak management is failing to deal effectively with a substance abuse problem within it's ranks according to this article. Is this a cause for concern?

 

[Mackensen]

It appears as though Amtrak management is failing to deal effectively with a substance abuse problem within it's ranks according to this article. Is this a cause for concern?

Probably not. This was discussed extensively on trainorders and it's most prevalent among maintenance staff--not engineers, conductors, OBS, or anyone actually running the train. While the numbers are higher than freight personnel, that's mostly a functional of how low they are in that sector. I remember seeing that there were 17 failed tests last year, out of thousands of employees.

I'm not worried.

 

[yarrow]

It appears as though Amtrak management is failing to deal effectively with a substance abuse problem within it's ranks according to this article. Is this a cause for concern?

Probably not. This was discussed extensively on trainorders and it's most prevalent among maintenance staff--not engineers, conductors, OBS, or anyone actually running the train. While the numbers are higher than freight personnel, that's mostly a functional of how low they are in that sector. I remember seeing that there were 17 failed tests last year, out of thousands of employees.

I'm not worried.

i guess i'm glad you don't see it as a problem. as i read the article it talks about "operating employees in safety sensitive positions" and that very few employees are actually tested. oh, and a positive test doesn't mean you are fired. i guess i'm just old fashioned

 

[OlympianHiawatha]

Anyone involved in operations of transportation systems should face the Death Penalty if found to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol during their tour of duty. They are putting lives at danger and need to be "rewarded" justly. Plain and simple-no argument needed here.

 

[yarrow]

Anyone involved in operations of transportation systems should face the Death Penalty is found to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol during their tour of duty. They are putting lives at danger and need to be "rewarded" justly. Plain and simple-no argument needed here.

i agree. evidently the amtrak contract doesn't

 

[boxcar479]

Anyone involved in operations of transportation systems should face the Death Penalty is found to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol during their tour of duty. They are putting lives at danger and need to be "rewarded" justly. Plain and simple-no argument needed here.

i agree. evidently the amtrak contract doesn't

I too agree. When it comes to public safety there should be mandatory testing for ALL with a zero tolerance policy and no union representation of those violators. Even though in college I did inhale... once, my views have really changed on this subject as time wore on and I had to be a responsible role model for our children. On the other hand this helps explain the wide variety of answers when it comes to policies, they are all high :lol: and making it up on the fly.

 

[Shortline]

It's not the contract, a lot of the problem is with the federal laws that govern testing. Part 219 of the law is very clear, when A RR can, and can not, perform drug testing. Because of the legal ramifications of a "wrongful termination" following a failed drug screen not done in accordance with the law, most railroads are very hesitant to perform anything but the mandated post accident, Reasonable Suspicion and federally mandated pre employment and random testing. Some also do optional reasonable cause testing (such as after running a red block) but there is no requirement to do so.

For example, a RR can't just walk in and test everyone on duty. If they did under company authority (rather than a federal DOT test) even if someone tests positive and is fired, the RR cannot revoke the persons license/certification because it wasn't a "DOT" test. Meaning, the person can just go to work at a RR across the street, the minute he can pass a ore-employment drug screen. The RR is not even allowed to disclose the failed non-DOT test. It's reduculous. The GOV and Unions share responsibility for this mess.

 

[AlanB]

and no union representation of those violators.

Just to add to what Shortline noted in his post, what you seek here would also require major changes in Federal laws. The union must represent the person under the current laws no matter what; they have no choice. It's kind of like the "Innocent until proven guilty" principal in our justice system.

This is why for example, despite the ill-logic of the situation and IMHO almost near insanity of the situation, the union must still fight for a teacher's job, even though there is rock solid proof that the teacher is a child molester.

 

[Mackensen]

It appears as though Amtrak management is failing to deal effectively with a substance abuse problem within it's ranks according to this article. Is this a cause for concern?

Probably not. This was discussed extensively on trainorders and it's most prevalent among maintenance staff--not engineers, conductors, OBS, or anyone actually running the train. While the numbers are higher than freight personnel, that's mostly a functional of how low they are in that sector. I remember seeing that there were 17 failed tests last year, out of thousands of employees.

I'm not worried.

i guess i'm glad you don't see it as a problem. as i read the article it talks about "operating employees in safety sensitive positions" and that very few employees are actually tested. oh, and a positive test doesn't mean you are fired. i guess i'm just old fashioned

I didn't say it wasn't a problem. That wasn't the original question. I just don't see it as a concern. The news organizations reporting this matter have grossly overstated the seriousness of the situation. Show me an actual threat to the safety of the railroad and I'll be concerned. This is ultimately a minor matter that's only getting a lot of play because it's bash-Amtrak season.

 

[boxcar479]

There's a season for that? :blink: I thought it was a year long activity for some!

 

[amamba]

It appears as though Amtrak management is failing to deal effectively with a substance abuse problem within it's ranks according to this article. Is this a cause for concern?

Probably not. This was discussed extensively on trainorders and it's most prevalent among maintenance staff--not engineers, conductors, OBS, or anyone actually running the train. While the numbers are higher than freight personnel, that's mostly a functional of how low they are in that sector. I remember seeing that there were 17 failed tests last year, out of thousands of employees.

I'm not worried.

i guess i'm glad you don't see it as a problem. as i read the article it talks about "operating employees in safety sensitive positions" and that very few employees are actually tested. oh, and a positive test doesn't mean you are fired. i guess i'm just old fashioned

I didn't say it wasn't a problem. That wasn't the original question. I just don't see it as a concern. The news organizations reporting this matter have grossly overstated the seriousness of the situation. Show me an actual threat to the safety of the railroad and I'll be concerned. This is ultimately a minor matter that's only getting a lot of play because it's bash-Amtrak season.

I agree with this. It really doesn't sound like its a huge safety issue, and the thing about marijuana is that it can stay in your system for weeks. So its not like these people are necessarily showing up to work high.

 

[oldtimer]

If you read the report it shows how Amtrak's upper level management was totally unaware of the requirements for testing. Even the middle level management could not explain the testing procedure and did not observe employees as required by the FRA.

The important fact that came out of the report is that ZERO ENGINEERS tested positive. These are the employees that operate the train (despite what you read in almost every newspaper story.) I personally have NO tolerance for any type of substance being used by anyone that I work with. It sure is different then 41 years ago when I was hired on the PC.

The important thing that is overlooked is that in the past Amtrak had an active joint labor-management group that used peer to peer as a way to stop the use of D & A on the railroad. It was called Operation RedBlock. It has become a victim of cost savings. Just please don't let the lives of passengers and employees also become victims of cost savings.

 

[yarrow]

It really doesn't sound like its a huge safety issue, and the thing about marijuana is that it can stay in your system for weeks. So its not like these people are necessarily showing up to work high.

i assume the employees knew it was a condition of employment that they test negative for certain substances and that there were reasons for that requirement. they did not meet these conditions of employment.

 

[VentureForth]

I agree with this. It really doesn't sound like its a huge safety issue, and the thing about marijuana is that it can stay in your system for weeks. So its not like these people are necessarily showing up to work high.

That just means they showed up high to work weeks ago rather than the day they're tested. And behavior is part of the discernment process, it seems.

 

[E Runs]

I agree with this. It really doesn't sound like its a huge safety issue, and the thing about marijuana is that it can stay in your system for weeks. So its not like these people are necessarily showing up to work high.

That just means they showed up high to work weeks ago rather than the day they're tested. And behavior is part of the discernment process, it seems.

Possibly, OR they sparked up on their day off.

 

[Ryan]

Anyone involved in operations of transportation systems should face the Death Penalty is found to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol during their tour of duty. They are putting lives at danger and need to be "rewarded" justly. Plain and simple-no argument needed here.

i agree. evidently the amtrak contract doesn't

The death penalty is a little ridiculous over the top, however.

 

[ehbowen]

The death penalty is a little ridiculous over the top, however.

No, I don't think so, and I've felt that way ever since an operator at the Galveston drawbridge offered me a toke one night while I was out on the bridge railfanning. (Safe to say, I refused.)

Different operator, but a couple of months later a barge loaded with acrylonitrile hit that bridge on a foggy night and exploded. Nobody killed, but the bridge was heavily damaged. High times and the high iron do not mix.

 

[George Harris]

Here is a push back from the BLET

http://www.ble-t.org/pr/news/newsflash.asp?id=5341

 

[Shawn Ryu]

No different than any other jobs involving physical labor I imagine.

 

[RampWidget]

Here is a push back from the BLET

http://www.ble-t.org...ash.asp?id=5341

Everyone should read the BLET response that George is referring to. It is fact-based, something that both the Washington Post and Bloomberg don't seem to be interested in here.

I have been involved in the transportation & logistics industry since 1986 as both a front-line hourly worker and as a salaried manager with accountability for safety results.

You can be assured that the positive rate on FRA random drug testing hovers around the one-half of one percent level. Plus, union-managed and Carrier supported Operation RedBlock and the Carriers' own Employee Assistance programs also make an enormous difference in taking employees that would otherwise be on the street jobless and work them through the recovery process.

I have often found myself at odds with labor organizations, but the BLET got it with this one. Bottom line: Do I trust the train & engine crews that operate the Amtrak trains I ride, often with my family? The answer is yes, without hesitation whatsoever. Same for the workers in the car/locomotive shops and the track & signal departments.

I wonder what kind of results we would see if we began random D&A testing on politicians & journalists while they were on the clock?

 

[NW cannonball]

Here is a push back from the BLET

http://www.ble-t.org...ash.asp?id=5341

I am totally disgusted by the way the media has been reporting this story. "4 times more likely to fail drug tests" vs "no engineers" - media based story on the worst subcategory - that's the headline - yeah the media have to sell news to sell ads - that's their "business model"

Like Mackensen said - there's a problem - but don't worry about Amtrak safety.

The important thing in the IG report (which I just found and read after reading the scary news reports) is that Amtrak needs to do and require and document observation of employees for evidence of impairment.

Random drug tests catch people who have used "illicit" drugs in the last few days - or weeks if marihuana. Can't detect people who are impaired on the job. The random tests are designed as a deterrent, not a safety check. The drugs they test for could in some cases actually improve on the job performance - namely cocaine and amphetamines (not if used to excess, not if in withdrawal). The downer-type drugs the DOT standard tests for are all impairing - Xanax type and opiods (but if there is an opiod habit, having the drug in your system is safer than not having it). Alcohol is the only drug that is provably impairing - but - testing is much less frequent than for the "illicit " drugs. And there is no testing for really seriously impairing drugs - like - for example LSD

The emphasis on observing performance is really really important. Because - there are many many sources of cognitive impairment, most of them not due to illicit drugs - could be medical problem, could be legal prescription drugs with side-effects (too many to name) , could be short-term stress due to family problems, could be due to sleep deprivation because of work schedule.

So - the actual IG report demanding that Amtrak enforce the observation requirement - seems like a good thing to me.

But - the scare headlines that imply that "4 times as many Amtrak workers are high on the job" -- so much media hype and total BS.

 

[amamba]

I agree with this. It really doesn't sound like its a huge safety issue, and the thing about marijuana is that it can stay in your system for weeks. So its not like these people are necessarily showing up to work high.

That just means they showed up high to work weeks ago rather than the day they're tested. And behavior is part of the discernment process, it seems.

Possibly, OR they sparked up on their day off.

Exactly - the test might come up positive because someone smoked on their day off. I could really care less if adults want to hit the ganja on their day off. But then again I think marijuana should be legalized, so take my comments with a grain of salt if you disagree.

 

[SP&S]

I wonder what kind of results we would see if we began random D&A testing on politicians & journalists while they were on the clock?

We have a winner right here! About a year ago the city proposed random drug tests for police officers and you never heard such a hue and cry - this from the folks who always say 'If you're not doing anything illegal you have nothing to worry about. Substance abuse problems cross all societal lines.

I have no problem with post-accident testing, and can see some benefit of randoms, but why does society only demand this of a certain few occupations? I'm talking about government mandates here, not a private company's policies.

On the other hand I do have a problem with the way this treats people as presumed guilty. Without getting into details, if you have ever been falsely accused you will treasure the classic tenet of American justice of innocent until proven guilty.

 

[NW cannonball]

I wonder what kind of results we would see if we began random D&A testing on politicians & journalists while they were on the clock?

We have a winner right here! About a year ago the city proposed random drug tests for police officers and you never heard such a hue and cry - this from the folks who always say 'If you're not doing anything illegal you have nothing to worry about. Substance abuse problems cross all societal lines.

I have no problem with post-accident testing, and can see some benefit of randoms, but why does society only demand this of a certain few occupations? I'm talking about government mandates here, not a private company's policies.

On the other hand I do have a problem with the way this treats people as presumed guilty. Without getting into details, if you have ever been falsely accused you will treasure the classic tenet of American justice of innocent until proven guilty.

Drug test the wonderful enforcers? won't happen. I've met too many cops who partake of the confiscated "good stuff".

The important thing - seems to me is

The IG's report noted that Amtrak management is not doing or documenting the cases where workers seem to be impaired. That is what passengers could reasonably worry about. I don't care why the engineer is impaired - drugs, family problems, sleep deprivation - whatever.

Supervisors have the duty to note when workers seem impaired -- sleep loss, whatever - what is important to me is -- is the Engineer or Conductor of Dispatcher competent on the job. I guess about 98% plus are competent and reliable. The rare cases when not are mostly not drug-related - the important

thing is that if impaired for whatever reason the worker can just say - sorry, can't do it this shift - and not be totally screwed by laying off.

 

[Shortline]

I wouldn't worry about the part saying management is not documenting signs if impairment. If you are in the industry, you can read between the lines on that one. What I strongly suspect they mean by that, is that the FRA mandates so many "signs and symptoms" observations per year, at various times a day, on nights, weekends, etc. during their audit of the railroads 219 programs (drug and alcohol programs) it's pretty common for them to find fault for the RR not documenting as many observations as they would like to see. Doesn't mean the management isn't showing things when they see problems, usually means the managers just haven't SEEN any issues and neglected to show a "test" for signs and symptoms. Again, really nothing to worry about here, it just sounds bad if the reader doesn't understand what the report is truly talking about.