Four railway companies have appealed to federal appeals courts to reject a new regulation mandating two-person train crews, arguing that the requirement is arbitrary, capricious, and an unlawful exercise of discretion.
Railroad's Opposition to The Safety Reform
Union Pacific, BNSF, and two short-line railroads, the Indiana Railroad and Florida East Coast Railway, filed the same objections to the Federal Railroad Administration's rule this week in various appellate courts.
The recent federal requirement, unveiled last week, marked a significant achievement in organized labor's ongoing efforts to uphold this practice. It coincided with heightened attention to railroad safety following the fiery derailment in eastern Ohio in February 2023.
Many of these railroads did not promptly justify their opposition to the rule. However, the industry has historically resisted such regulations, with the Association of American Railroads trade group stating last week that the rule lacked foundation and safety data. Short lines like the Indiana Railroad often operate with one-person crews, whereas major freight railroads maintain two-person crews as per their union contracts.
Union Pacific stated that the rule, which lacks evidence demonstrating the safety superiority of two-person crews, impedes their competitiveness in a rapidly evolving transportation industry and obstructs their ability to train their workforce for future job roles.
BNSF referred inquiries to the Association of American Railroads, while the two smaller railroads did not respond to messages on Thursday.
Railroad Safety Enhancement
The regulators who introduced the rule last Tuesday, along with the unions advocating for it for years, contend that having two individuals in the locomotive cab offers distinct safety advantages, arguing that the presence of two crew members helps maintain alertness and enables immediate response to any issues that arise during the train operation, including serving as the initial first-responder in the event of a derailment.
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg emphasized the urgency of enhancing railroad safety, citing the notable incident last year when a Norfolk Southern train derailed near a town on the Ohio-Pennsylvania border, which resulted in the spillage of various hazardous chemicals, igniting a fire. This event in East Palestine prompted calls for reform, although progress on such measures has stalled in Congress.
On Thursday, Buttigieg and the Federal Railroad Administration chose not to provide comments regarding the legal challenges to the new rule, which is scheduled to come into effect in early June.
Eddie Hall, the leader of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen union, remarked that this legal challenge is just more evidence of railroads prioritizing profits over safety, asserting that maintaining two individuals in the locomotive does not hinder railroads from investing in new technology and the industry should concentrate on enhancing safety measures.
Hall commented that the railroads' action was foreseeable, noting their consistent opposition to every safety reform along with their trade association.
Railroads have maintained that the composition of train crews should be negotiated through contract discussions rather than regulated by lawmakers or regulators. They argue that there is not sufficient data to prove the safety superiority of two-person crews. Present safety statistics cannot adequately demonstrate the safety performance of one-person crews since all major railroads currently operate with two-person crews.
The Safety Rule's Exception
The new rule does provide an exception allowing short-line railroads to maintain one-person crews if they have operated this way for over two years and have a safety plan in place. However, the rule would challenge any railroad attempting to reduce its crew to just one person.
Railroad's Contesting The Federal Rule
Railroads have frequently contested state attempts to mandate two-person crews, so their legal challenge against this new federal rule is not surprising.
The major freight railroads contend that automatic braking systems, aimed at preventing collisions, have rendered the second person in the locomotive cab redundant. They assert that a conductor stationed in a truck could effectively address any train issues. Additionally, they argue that removing the conductor from the train would enhance their quality of life by eliminating the need to work irregular hours on the road.
The major freight railroads contend that automatic braking systems, aimed at preventing collisions, have rendered the second person in the locomotive cab redundant. They assert that a conductor stationed in a truck could effectively address any train issues. Additionally, they argue that removing the conductor from the train would enhance their quality of life by eliminating the need to work irregular hours on the road.
