Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation (2020) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 79-164
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 79... ...
A-1 Case Study Narratives A-2 Big Blue Bus, Santa Monica, California A-7 Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Austin, Texas A-14 Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority, Orlando, Florida A-16 Chicago Transit Authority, Chicago, Illinois A-18 Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority, Cleveland, Ohio A-22 Jacksonville Transportation Authority, Jacksonville, Florida A-26 King County Metro, Seattle, Washington A-29 Lane Transit District, Springfield, Oregon A-31 Lee County Transit, Fort Myers, Florida A-35 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Los Angeles, California A-42 Maryland Transit Administration, Baltimore, Maryland A-47 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, Boston, Massachusetts A-53 Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, Atlanta, Georgia A-58 Miami-Dade Transit, Miami, Florida A-64 Sacramento Regional Transit District, Sacramento, California A-66 Sarasota County Area Transit, Sarasota, Florida A-69 Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania A-74 Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon, Portland, Oregon A-77 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, Washington, DC A-82 Participants in Federal Transit Administration Safety Management System Pilot A-86 Endnotes A P P E N D I X A
|
From page 80... ...
A-2 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Big Blue Bus Santa Monica, California Employee Safety Reporting System Program Description Big Blue Bus (BBB) implemented a nonpunitive near miss and hazard reporting program in 2015, where employees can report dangerous occurrences, hazards, and near miss events.
|
From page 81... ...
Case Study Narratives A-3 BBB's transit safety and security officer reports to the safety and training manager, who is the agency's designated chief safety officer. The safety and security officer manages SHARP in-house, and all outcomes and resolutions are shared during the quarterly safety meetings without mention of the reporting employee's name.
|
From page 82... ...
A-4 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Figure A-2. BBB SHARP Report Form.
|
From page 83... ...
Case Study Narratives A-5 Figure A-2. (Continued)
|
From page 84... ...
A-6 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Representatives attribute this decrease to the mitigations that were incorporated as a result of the employee reporting program. Additionally, as an improvement to the previous hazard reporting program at BBB, all SHARP report information is entered into the SHARP Master Log to allow for future trend analyses.
|
From page 85... ...
Case Study Narratives A-7 Accident Review Committee is separate from the BBB safety committees and consists of a safety and security coordinator, a union representative, a motor coach operator, and a third party, the Santa Monica Police Department. Barriers to Implementation The key barrier to implementation reported by BBB personnel was the type of information that is currently reported on the SHARP Report Form, as near misses are not typically reported.
|
From page 86... ...
A-8 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Its bus operators and maintenance technicians are contractor employees and the use of the ESR is a standard requirement written into Capital Metro's contractor agreements. Reporting Practices Agency employees and its contractor employees may report safety concerns online at https://app.capitalmetro.org/safety or through the Hotline at (512)
|
From page 87... ...
Case Study Narratives A-9 Figure A-4. Creating a log-in and beginning the reporting process.
|
From page 88... ...
A-10 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Post-Reporting Follow-Up Activities Once the safety concern has been submitted, the ESR program manager reviews the report and forwards the content of the report to the department and/or service provider assigned the responsibility of investigating the concern and providing a response to the reporter. At this point, the program manager changes the concern status from "open" to "in progress." The department assigned to investigate the report must respond with a resolution within 10 days of the assignment, and a response to the reporter must be provided within 30 days.
|
From page 89... ...
Case Study Narratives A-11 option of allowing reporters to submit photos of the hazard or concern. There may be costs associated with this modification that are presently unknown.
|
From page 90... ...
A-12 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation program. One of the methods it is using is informing employees about federal public transportation and passenger transportation laws and regulations that protect them from harassment and aggression from their employers and direct supervisors when they report hazards, close calls, and near misses.
|
From page 91... ...
Case Study Narratives A-13 The agency shared its concern that its contracted operator may be using its own separate ESR system. Although that is not a barrier per se, Capital Metro has been diligent in working with its contractor to express the need for the agency to be the clearinghouse for safety concerns expressed through employee reporting.
|
From page 92... ...
A-14 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority Orlando, Florida Employee Safety Reporting System Program Description The Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (dba LYNX) is the main transportation hub for central Florida and serves Orange, Osceola, and Seminole counties, with limited service to Polk County.
|
From page 93... ...
Case Study Narratives A-15 their own ESR system, which LYNX monitors. No training is offered.
|
From page 94... ...
A-16 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation LYNX will be tracking preventable accidents, incidents, incidents by route, type of accidents, number of National Transit Database reportable events, and operator assault, all of which are on a dashboard built into the program. The ESR system allows for tracking and reporting safety hazards to management and provides a supplemental method of increasing system safety at LYNX and protecting its employees and riders and the public.
|
From page 95... ...
Case Study Narratives A-17 Reporting Practices Safety Department personnel -- generally, a safety officer and two safety managers -- check Safe Line voicemails daily. These individuals are the only ones who have access to the ESR system.
|
From page 96... ...
A-18 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Barriers to Implementation CTA did indicate that an adversarial relationship between a transit agency and the collective bargaining unit could become a significant barrier to implementation. As reflected in the background research performed for this study and the information obtained from case study sites, involving these units early in the process can help overcome some of these barriers.
|
From page 97... ...
Case Study Narratives A-19 by FTA. Data collected through the ESR system are collected and maintained by GCRTA.
|
From page 98... ...
A-20 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Figure A-9. GCRTA Hazard Report Form.
|
From page 99... ...
Case Study Narratives A-21 hazard. The Director of Safety discusses all reported hazards with the Safety Committee during bimonthly scheduled meetings.
|
From page 100... ...
A-22 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Barriers to Implementation GCRTA has not encountered significant barriers to the implementation of the program. However, representatives indicated that the majority of reports that are currently received through the ESR system are minimal in nature -- primarily related to issues such as needing adhesive bandages in a district first aid kit.
|
From page 101... ...
Case Study Narratives A-23 unreported unsafe acts, providing the opportunity for safety assessments and opportunities to strategically improve JTA's safety performance. Related Policies or Procedures JTA is currently developing a draft nonpunitive ESR system policy.
|
From page 102... ...
A-24 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation The Safety and Security Department can also see the reported concerns. JTA instituted several checks and balances in its reporting program through the assignment of follow-up responsibilities across the Dispatch Center, the Risk Department, the Safety and Security Department, and the private security force.
|
From page 103... ...
Case Study Narratives A-25 of the app, dispatch was required to call several people to notify them individually of an incident that was taking place. With the implementation of the app, dispatch can contact several different people simultaneously with the same message, thus improving the overall performance and response time of the agency.
|
From page 104... ...
A-26 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation photo and short video that showed how dark the conditions were. After the report was received, the lighting configuration at the shelter was improved and the hazard was eliminated.
|
From page 105... ...
Case Study Narratives A-27 Presently, King County Metro manages the SIR Reporting System in-house, and all outcomes are shared during monthly Safety Committee meetings without mention of the reporting employee's name. The agency will continue to manage this program directly after digitalization of the program has occurred.
|
From page 106... ...
A-28 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Training King County Metro has tailored its current training program by employment position. However, once Origami has become fully implemented, the agency is expecting to modify its training program to provide the same type of instruction to all employees.
|
From page 107... ...
Case Study Narratives A-29 reporting program. Other than its annual Safe Driver Award, King County Metro does not have specific awards linked to the ESR system.
|
From page 108... ...
A-30 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation also request the assistance of the Safety Department to prioritize the report received. Corrective actions are taken depending on the severity or level of risk assigned to the reports.
|
From page 109... ...
Case Study Narratives A-31 Blue Card to report the unsafe condition. Additional improvements that were instituted as a result of Blue Card reports include replacement of lighting at bus stops, reprogramming of erroneous route information on a bus head sign, and repair of leaks at the transit agency restroom facilities.
|
From page 110... ...
A-32 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation the result to the originator of the report, if known. If the originator is unknown, the Safety Specialist will post the resolution to the safety boards in several locations in LeeTran's Operating Facility and in the agency's safety bulletins.
|
From page 111... ...
Case Study Narratives A-33 on safety boards placed in strategic locations within the facility and highlighted in monthly safety bulletins. In both cases, the resolution of the issue is presented by the Safety Specialist and discussed during quarterly safety meetings.
|
From page 112... ...
A-34 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation from an independent expert. It was paramount to have this consultant team assist the agency, as it provided LeeTran staff members with unbiased recommendations relating to employee reporting as well as other key SMS fundamentals.
|
From page 113... ...
Case Study Narratives A-35 formal performance metric system to gather and analyze all the information collected from the ESR system once it has sufficient data. Currently, the volume of the reports received is still too small to define a successful trend in any specific hazards addressed.
|
From page 114... ...
A-36 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation safety concerns and hazards while also providing a method for management to identify, evaluate, and correct or avoid hazards holistically through corrective actions. In January 2019, the agency created an online version of SAFE-7.
|
From page 115... ...
Case Study Narratives A-37 Employees may report hazards or near miss events that occur on or off LA Metro property, as illustrated in Figure A-16. The SAFE-7 system prompts employees to identify the category of the hazard or indicate that they are reporting a near miss event (Figure A-17)
|
From page 116... ...
A-38 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Figure A-17. Hazard reporting categories.
|
From page 117... ...
Case Study Narratives A-39 or the originator notified of the report and related actions within this time frame. If the reporting employee is not contacted but has provided contact information, he or she can contact the safety department for assistance.
|
From page 118... ...
A-40 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Teamsters Union) were involved during the inception and implementation of the SAFE-7 system 25 years ago.
|
From page 119... ...
Case Study Narratives A-41 The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
|
From page 120... ...
A-42 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation reported and the implementation of corrective actions to mitigate unsafe conditions reported. LA Metro can track and trend the most prominent concerns, now that it has fully transitioned to the online ESR system.
|
From page 121... ...
Case Study Narratives A-43 that ESR would be required as it transitions from a system safety program, plan-driven approach to safety to the SMS approach, which will drive its new PTASP. Related Policies or Procedures MTA has not officially established formal policies or procedures related to its ESR system and currently relies on promotional materials posted in its facilities.
|
From page 122... ...
A-44 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation If an employee does not feel the hazard they reported was resolved adequately, the employee may notify the safety officer of his or her concern during the required debrief that occurs if the hazard is not reported anonymously. If the employee reported the hazard anonymously and is not satisfied with the corrective action, he or she may file another report.
|
From page 123... ...
Case Study Narratives A-45 Figure A-21. MTA Commitment to Safety with ESR system references.
|
From page 124... ...
A-46 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Figure A-22. MTA hazard reporting program poster.
|
From page 125... ...
Case Study Narratives A-47 Elements of Success MTA currently tracks several performance measures to gauge the efficacy of its program, including the number of open and closed reports; the hazard classification of each report; average days to closure; reports per month; reports by mode; and reports by area, such as facilities, equipment, systems, and security. In addition, MTA recently formalized its program into a directive approved by the accountable executive (the MTA Administrator)
|
From page 126... ...
A-48 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Figure A-24. MBTA Form B: Notification to MBTA Safety.
|
From page 127... ...
Case Study Narratives A-49 and acts that are considered negligent or willful violation of MBTA rules. While all reported near miss events would be nonpunitive, the policy currently under development will clearly define what prohibited acts will result in disciplinary actions.
|
From page 128... ...
A-50 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Peer Review Team (PRT) for analysis and development of implementations for consideration.
|
From page 129... ...
Case Study Narratives A-51 MBTA policies and procedures that support workplace safety. Module A, "What is System Safety?
|
From page 130... ...
A-52 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Elements of Success MBTA representatives indicated their understanding of the significant importance of establishing and encouraging a mature safety culture that will support a well-developed and fully utilized ESR system. They also connect mature safety culture to the ability to gain a better understanding of the overall risk of operations from frontline workers and subsequently focus limited resources on areas that present the greatest risk to the agency.
|
From page 131... ...
Case Study Narratives A-53 keep the tripping hazard off the ground. Another hazard reported was related to nighttime track worker concerns about animals on the track and limited lighting.
|
From page 132... ...
A-54 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation MARTA's security and maintenance departments each have their own reporting mechanism that maintains logs and corrective actions of reported hazards and concerns. Related Policies and Procedures MARTA's Safety Hazard Notification and Escalation Process establishes the steps that must be taken to gather, investigate, and correct the reported hazard.
|
From page 133... ...
Case Study Narratives A-55 • If the employee is not satisfied with the response, the employee has 3 calendar days to request initiation of the appeal process. Once the investigation process has concluded, the reporting database is updated to reflect the report status as "denied," "closed," or "pending approval." If, after corrective actions have been taken, the hazard has not been resolved 5 days following entry, the Safety 1st report will automatically escalate to the unit director with copies provided to the ATU officer, the JHSC, and the assistant general manager (AGM)
|
From page 134... ...
A-56 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation assurance. The director has 5 days to address the submitted Safety 1st report by an action plan and/or a specific timeline for resolving the issue.
|
From page 135... ...
Case Study Narratives A-57 training, and MARTA developed an e-learning presentation on the program that is available to all employees. Stakeholder Input MARTA's JHSC, which includes an ATU representative, was involved in the development of the program and is responsible for any review or updates to the process.
|
From page 136... ...
A-58 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Barriers to Implementation MARTA representatives did not identify barriers to implementation. However, they recognize that periodic program and process evaluation is necessary.
|
From page 137... ...
Case Study Narratives A-59 Related Policies or Procedures MDT employee rule books require the reporting of safety violations, including observed violations. In addition, the agency has instituted the Rail Service On-Track Good Faith Challenge Policy (SOP PR-RS-032)
|
From page 138... ...
A-60 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Figure A-31. MDT Report of Safety Concern.
|
From page 139... ...
Case Study Narratives A-61 if resolution requires action by someone other than the supervisor, a copy of the form is submitted to the appropriate MDT division and the Office of Safety and Security. A copy of the form that includes the narrative providing the outcome of the supervisor's evaluation and resolution, the action assigned, and the required completion date is provided to the employee.
|
From page 140... ...
A-62 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation the investigation outcome and associated resolutions. If the report was submitted anonymously, the reporter will learn of the outcome through the Safety Committee or through his or her division manager.
|
From page 141... ...
Case Study Narratives A-63 Figure A-32. MDT Office of Safety and Security, Audit and Compliance Section, Employee Survey.
|
From page 142... ...
A-64 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation typical disembarking station. An older female passenger was taken to a bus bay some distance from the Metrorail station.
|
From page 143... ...
Case Study Narratives A-65 is currently in the process of transitioning the tracking aspect of the near miss reports to SacRT's SharePoint site to allow for seamless communication between departments. The majority of near miss reports that are submitted are anonymous.
|
From page 144... ...
A-66 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Elements of Success SacRT was awarded the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA's) Gold Standard Award in 2018 for its improvements in safety and security along its light rail line.
|
From page 145... ...
Case Study Narratives A-67 Reporting Practices Anonymous safety reporting can be completed online, and the reports are sent directly to ATU Local 1701 and senior management. SCAT uses Smartsheet as a third-party data collection tool for all safety data that are reported electronically.
|
From page 146... ...
A-68 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Stakeholder Input Union representation assisted SCAT management in the development and implementation of the reporting formats used. SCAT's safety manager, members of the Safety Committee, and ATU worked collaboratively to define what was needed to develop a nonpunitive hazard reporting program.
|
From page 147... ...
Case Study Narratives A-69 representatives suggested that this method of safety promotion -- positive reinforcement -- is one way to improve system safety. Between 2016 and 2019, bus operator exposure to potentially violent situations decreased by 44% on buses and by 71% at transit stations and stops.
|
From page 148... ...
A-70 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation further, preventing the occurrence of potentially serious safety-related consequences. Fatalities and personal injuries do not fall into the category of a close call and will continue to be reported and handled under the current SEPTA and FRA regulations, or any subsequent revisions to SEPTA rules and/or FRA regulations.
|
From page 149... ...
Case Study Narratives A-71 Every issue that is e-mailed or called in through the safety hotline goes directly to the System Safety Department for review, and that department ensures that corrective actions have been assigned to the appropriate department. If a safety concern is reported through the Veritas customer service system, each reported issue is assigned to the Safety Department and is tracked in Veritas until it is closed out.
|
From page 150... ...
A-72 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation reporting training emphasizes that employees are never too busy for safety and that reporting hazards is faster and easier than ever before with the new reporting options using e-mail, the hotline, or the online SEPTANow portal. SEPTA teaches employees that the benefits of the new reporting mechanisms available make it easier to report, allow them to check on the status of the follow-up measures that are instituted, and afford System Safety the opportunity to provide feedback and track and trend the hazard reports.
|
From page 151... ...
Case Study Narratives A-73 SEPTA, each of which is a union management working group of employees that meets monthly to discuss safety concerns and review accident/injury trends. A System Safety representative who participates in the monthly LSC meetings is assigned to each LSC.
|
From page 152... ...
A-74 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon Portland, Oregon Employee Safety Reporting System Program Description The Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet) ESR system is referred to as a "request for safety assessment" (RSA)
|
From page 153... ...
Case Study Narratives A-75 then assigns the RSA to applicable departments for review and input. Occasionally, this step includes coordination with external parties as well, such as city engineers, who should be contacted to request a signal timing change.
|
From page 154... ...
A-76 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation is also responsible for rendering assistance as necessary to bring open RSAs to closed status using detailed explanations and effective resolutions. The RSA administrator is a designated member of the RSA Team.
|
From page 155... ...
Case Study Narratives A-77 • The glare from interior lights was reduced by the use of red diffusers and changes in configuration. • Bus mirror configuration was adjusted to improve operator line-of-sight.
|
From page 156... ...
A-78 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Related Policies or Procedures WMATA updated its MOU with BTS on July 23, 2018. The purpose of the MOU is to document the mutual interest between WMATA and its employees in improving system safety; establish the process used to capture trends and analyze data; identify safety systemic, organizational, or procedural issues; and establish the process used to define corrective actions and associated preventive measures.
|
From page 157... ...
Case Study Narratives A-79 Step Responsible Party 1 Identify an unsafe event or condition; initiate and then complete a close call report. Employee(s)
|
From page 158... ...
A-80 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Currently, only L689, L922, and their frontline supervisors are eligible to report through C3RS for protection from discipline. The agency is in the process of expanding the program to all WMATA employees.
|
From page 159... ...
Case Study Narratives A-81 future reporting, WMATA deliberately and regularly emphasizes the successes of the reporting program through quarterly newsletters and at regular safety meetings. With the confidential aspect of the reporting program at WMATA, it is important that the safety improvements and policy or procedural changes are emphasized organization-wide to ensure that the person who reported the hazard or safety issue is aware that a mitigation measure was put in place.
|
From page 160... ...
A-82 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation High-level managers have been assigned to participate on PRTs, as described above, and are empowered to implement new safety actions without waiting for executive-level approval. This has led to a reduction in the time it takes to make necessary safety improvements, which, in turn, demonstrates the importance of the ESR system to reporters and the value of their reporting in improving system safety.
|
From page 161... ...
Case Study Narratives A-83 Charles County Transit. FTA established these pilots in an effort to provide guidance on SMS implementation, including the importance of ESR in both the SMS safety risk management and safety assurance functions, to the public transportation industry.
|
From page 162... ...
A-84 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation No specific training is dedicated to the ESR system at TSFC, but the program is mentioned at onboarding and periodically at all-staff meetings. No costs related to the program have been identified by TSFC.
|
From page 163... ...
Case Study Narratives A-85 the agency requires that implemented mitigation measures are monitored for effectiveness and unexpected consequences to ensure that the mitigation does not create a hazard. Charles County VanGO Charles County VanGO provides public bus and specialized ADA demand-response services throughout Charles County through contracted services with MV Transportation.
|
From page 164... ...
A-86 Characteristics and Elements of Nonpunitive Employee Safety Reporting Systems for Public Transportation Endnotes 1. https://www.bigbluebus.com/Newsroom/Press/Big-Blue-Bus-Honored-with-the-Gold-Award-for-BusSafety -- from-the-American-Public-Transportation-Association.aspx.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.