Cab Cams an "invastion of privacy"???

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin
I don't see where any serious issue of Liberty is involved here. We are talking about what level of monitoring is appropriate when someone is on duty in a safety critical position, not when they are out on a garden stroll. :) Afterall no one is taking away anyone's Liberty to not be in such a position. But if one willfully chooses to take on a responsibility it is reasonable to expect that a certain set of conditions including certain constraints on ones lifestyle might be involved.
 
This isn't "Government" monitoring (even if a government agency is watching their own in acting as a form of commerce, ie: a government operated railroad). Having a job and being expected to follow rules is hardly an issue of individual "Liberty".

As for John Locke's Social Contract theory, again, we're not talking about government infringing on personal liberties. We're talking about the safe operation of a mode of transit where there is a significant amount of human lives under the control of a single person.

Aircraft MUST be operated with a crew of two in the cockpit when acting as an air transport. That's the FAA rule. Manufactures also have rules that say you gotta have two in the cockpit. There are only a smattering of jet aircraft that don't require a crew of two, and only when flown for non-air transport purposes.

Taxi and bus drivers can be seen by the passengers. If something is wrong, they can in effect mutiny. They don't have that luxury on a train like Metrolink.

I remember as a kid in Japan, the cab of the EMUs had a window behind the driver. They had the luxury of choosing whether they wanted to close the curtain or not. Loved it when they didn't. Without ANY exception and over hundreds of rides, I've never seen a Japanese commuter train driver act unprofessionally. Some actually called out every signal, every light, every indicator on their panel audibly - not for an audience, but because it was their job. They wouldn't care if there was a camera or a supervisor in the cab - they were doing their job.

Now, I haven't been there since texting came into existence, but I don't suppose things have changed at all.

Back to Dutchrailnut: Dude, you don't read, do you? The comment was specifically referring to the fact that they won't catch an infringement with the cameras immediately, but if they review the material on the hard drive regularly without prejudice, the could observe trends.

As for Metrolink, if they have disciplined Sanchez and he kept breaking the rules, the blood of 25 is on management's hands. Make cab distractions an immediate terminable event. Goes for freight operators that share their own lines with passsengers, too (ie: Amtrak).
 
[snip]As for Metrolink, if they have disciplined Sanchez and he kept breaking the rules, the blood of 25 is on management's hands. Make cab distractions an immediate terminable event. Goes for freight operators that share their own lines with passsengers, too (ie: Amtrak).
Actually the blood is mostly on the hands of Connex, the contracted operator of the line. (BTW, they just lost the contract to Amtrak). Metrolink gets some as well because they were aware of the discipline.

"A failure in management of the Metrolink operations that contributed to the accident was publicly revealed during the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) hearings. Apparently, the company that was contracted by Metrolink to run the operation of the trains, Connex, had been made aware of Sanchez’s cell phone use while operating the train. Connex managers did not enforce the absolute prohibition on cell phone use and failed to remove Sanchez from the cab."

One year later: is Metrolink safer now?

Lessons learned but still a long way to go

By Joan Trossman Bien 09/03/2009 Ventrua County Reporter.

BTW, I was wrong, he sent 57 text messages, the last one 22 seconds before impact.
 
Could you please describe a scenario in which an unauthorized person being in the cab operating the locomotive under the close guidance of the engineer, with him or her ready to take control at a seconds notice, could endanger anyone (physical danger, ignoring potential legal trouble for the engineer or unauthorized person)?
In addition to "liability" which I am sure you are already aware....

OK.... hypothetically speaking.... you are in the locomotive cab with me on a trip. First off.... whether I allowed you in there or not, you are still trespassing in the eyes of the railroad! Did you have a cell phone in your pocket on your cab ride? If so, now you are with me on the trip in our hypothetical situation and during our tour of duty while the train is in operation, your phone rings, receives a text, or you make a call on it! In addition to your trespassing in an unauthorized area you are placing me at risk by having a personal electronic device in use in an area it is not supposed to be! The list can go on and on.....

Sorry, I had several cab rides as a kid and teen myself, but as an trainman I completely understand the risks those who allowed it took by having me "along for the ride." Hence is why I as a conductor won't allow it on my train or tour of duty.

OBS gone freight...
 
Well, I can see my opinion on this is very unpopular. And I'm sorry a lot of you feel that way. But nothing I read on this forum is going to change the decision I would make that in that situation.
How many of you can honestly say that there was never a point in your life where if offered a cab ride or a chance at the throttle you would have taken it?
No argument with you in respect to "nothing on this forum" is going to change your decision.

But have a railroad detective agent pay you a visit with evidence of your presence in an unauthorized area (such as a locomotive cab), and I am sure you will take note rather quickly!!!

You should consider how easy it is to be caught in this day and age! The camera doesn't even have to be there. And if something happens while you are present in the locomotive cab, chances are the event recorder "black box" has a record of your presence (i.e. your voice, etc)!

OBS gone freight...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Could you please describe a scenario in which an unauthorized person being in the cab operating the locomotive under the close guidance of the engineer, with him or her ready to take control at a seconds notice, could endanger anyone (physical danger, ignoring potential legal trouble for the engineer or unauthorized person)?
Totally unrelated scenario, but an example of a "supervised" encroachment of a professional space. When I was in 9th grade [one of four state-side furloughs my parents were on while I was growing up in Japan for those who are continuity fanatics], I was one of those kids that rode in the front of the school bus and always talked to the bus driver. He was a friendly sort and one day I asked if I could start the engine on the bus. He told me to make sure that it wasn't in gear - that I would feel slop in the stick. I pressed the clutch and turned the key. When the bus started, I let off the clutch, and it lurched forward and smaked the bus in front of us. Broke a headlight and tail light. I thank GOD to this day that there wasn't a student inbetween our busses. Turned out that the bus was in gear - but the stick was still loose in my opinion because I didn't have the experience to know the difference between in-gear slop and neutral slop on a 1980 Bluebird school bus. The driver told me to get in the back and shut up. He totally took the heat for me.

I'm not familiar enough with the cab of a P42 or an F59PHI. I don't know that there's nothing that I can touch that could mess things up real bad.

23 years later, I continue to remember that and other stupid things that could have really hurt people through my life. I've got to do a lot of exciting things, too. At the risk of sounding like a protectionist, I'd rather my son be a little less risky and a bit more safe.
 
23 years later, I continue to remember that and other stupid things that could have really hurt people through my life. I've got to do a lot of exciting things, too. At the risk of sounding like a protectionist, I'd rather my son be a little less risky and a bit more safe.
Don't we all, particularly those of us who have a kid that has gone in the other direction.
 
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin
Although Franklin probably agreed with that quote, it comes from Richard Jackson. Franklin actually said the following, which is very similar: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Wikiquotes
 
Wow, a fox news story I agree with! :)

Although I agree with what is said in this report, its author employs the usual Fox English.

...department is developing it's [sic] camera policy...
Sheesh. Such an unnecessary shot. I've seen plenty of lib columnists not know which synonym of "there" to use. Besides, this is not even really a "Fox" reporter, but rather a blog contributor.

Wow, how people are so vitriolic against Fox!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow, a fox news story I agree with! :)

Although I agree with what is said in this report, its author employs the usual Fox English.

...department is developing it's [sic] camera policy...
Sheesh. Such an unnecessary shot. I've seen plenty of lib columnists not know which synonym of "there" to use. Besides, this is not even really a "Fox" reporter, but rather a blog contributor.

Wow, how people are so vitriolic against Fox!
Hello,

Theses are not synonyms, "there", "their" and "they're". Each spelling means a very different thing.

But, back to the topic at hand, In the event of an accident, I think investigators might likely learn more from a camera mounted on an Engineer's hat as opposed to a camera focused on the Engineer himself.

Thank you.
 
Hi Folks,

I'm a newbie to the board, but have ridden Amtrak for the last 30 years for around 75,000 miles. Have to be honest that I've never given much thought to what might be going on in the cab of a locomotive. On the pro-cam side, I guess having video to review could exonerate a driver in a wreck who has done nothing wrong. On the anti-cam side, it doesn't show much trust in the folks employeed to drive the train. Is this a safety issue? Or a management/union distrust issue? Does anyone know of further documentation that can give the rationale behind this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top