The purpose of this study is to document successful practices and training initiatives, including bus operator training and retraining programs, that have been effective in reducing accidents and incidents. Recognizing that safety does not occur in a vacuum and that mitigation measures are not strictly confined to the training of bus operators, the study also focuses on other system approaches that have been implemented to address safety hazards. These approaches include various technology applications, infrastructure modifications, and programs and initiatives such as driver incentive programs and close call/near miss reporting. To effectively meet the primary objectives of the study, a literature review was conducted, a survey of selected transit agencies performed, and detailed case examples of 11 public transit agencies were conducted, from among the survey respondents on the basis of their responses to the survey or the authors’ knowledge of successful safety programs implemented. The survey of select transit agencies was conducted through the use of a 28-question electronic survey instrument sent to 42 different transit agency representatives throughout the United States. The method used for selecting transit agencies ensured that there would be both regional and size variation in systems represented from across the nation, as well as an acceptable survey response rate. Thirty-seven of the transit agencies responded, yielding an 88% response rate. Among the agencies that responded to the survey, 92% track contributing factors of incidents. The most prevalent contributing factors to safety-related incidents reported by respondents are human factors. Distractions are also a common contributing factor. The agencies monitor and mitigate safety-related trends by collecting and analysing transit safety data, reviewing accident reports, performing internal safety reviews, and through close call/near miss and other employee reporting, including the use of comment cards. Safety incidents are mitigated using methods such as expanded and issue-focused new operator training, targeted refresher training, remedial training, technology applications, safety campaigns and promotions, safety bulletins, and safety performance awards. A number of agencies provide training on safety issues identified through data-centric methods, employee input, and other means. Post-incident safety training or remedial training is required in 94% of the agencies that responded to the survey. Five of the responding agencies offer simulator training and consider it to be an effective way of mitigating safety-related issues without the risks associated with errors behind the wheel. The survey respondents also reported the application of various technologies to reduce safety incidents, including vehicle tracking systems, driver monitoring systems (DMSs), security cameras, operator-activated panic buttons, stop announcements, and video data recorders. When asked about the effectiveness of the technology applications in use at their transit agency, 58% of respondents said they were effective. Many of the agencies that use a telemetry-based DMS value the ability to address likely incidents before their occurrence. The ability to monitor and track an operator’s behaviour while driving and then to target a coaching or counselling session with that operator on observed unsafe behaviours was viewed as very important. A few agencies speculated that improved operator driving habits and the reduction of transit incidents were due simply to the operators’ awareness of the video recording and its ability to track, for example, aggressive driving and hard braking events. Survey respondents generally agreed that accountability at all levels of the transit agency is necessary to establish a comprehensive safety culture among all employees. Another theme that was present throughout the survey responses was the importance of training–including new operator training, refresher training, and remedial training–described as the key to keeping operators informed and up to date on agency policies and on recent incidents, in an effort to combat the factors that contributed to such events. Survey responses were consistent in their view of safety, stating that safety must be addressed holistically and stressing that no one solution will prevent or reduce transit safety incidents or safety risks for transit agencies. The case examples included in this report were selected on the basis of their self-identifed and self-defined successes in instituting programs that demonstrated improved safety results, including the reduction of transit collisions and other incidents. Eleven case example sites were selected from among the survey respondents: • Charlotte Area Transit (Charlotte, North Carolina) • City of Madison Metro Transit (Madison, Wisconsin) • Greater Bridgeport Transit (Bridgeport, Connecticut) • Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (Cleveland, Ohio) • Jacksonville Transportation Authority (Jacksonville, Florida) • Kansas City Area Transportation Authority (Kansas City, Missouri) • King County Metro (Seattle, Washington) • Lane Transit District (Springfield, Oregon) • Solano County Transit (Vallejo, California) • TriMet (Portland, Oregon) • Utah Transit Authority (Salt Lake City, Utah). The following specific discussion points are reflected in the case example narratives: • Areas of greatest concern, including issues for which initiatives were undertaken; • Training programs and initiatives, including content, delivery methods, and duration; • Technology solutions; • Safety campaigns, incentives, and awards; • Other policies and procedures that support comprehensive safety programs; and • The role of the chief executive officer (CEO)/general manager (GM) in ensuring the success of safety programs. All case example agencies shared certain qualities and characteristics, including an across the-agency philosophy recognizing the importance of employee participation and input. • All case example agencies have adopted and enforce distracted driving/wireless distraction policies and procedures. The majority of the agencies have zero tolerance for these violations. • All case example agencies applied multiple approaches to address areas of safety concern. • All case example agencies work across teams to improve transit safety, and this process/culture is set and supported by the CEO/GM. • All case example agencies conduct thorough accident and incident investigations and use audio/video recordings in their examination. Each agency has an accident review board or a body with similar function that includes representation from across teams. • All agencies have a structured process for data collection, analysis, and review. • All case example agencies provide regular, comprehensive refresher training for their bus operators. Each agency reported success in its safety improvement programs and identified training as a central element. • All agencies cited the value of using actual onboard video and audio recordings in refresher and remedial training, and in counselling sessions with specific bus operators. • All agencies recognized the value of their employees to their organizations. Each provided bus operators with opportunities for input and engagement with transit agency leadership. • The use of telemetric DMSs by four case example locations and their reported successes are noteworthy. The agencies discussed the value of these systems for modifying driver behaviour and improving system safety. The case example agencies cited the actions of inattentive drivers in other vehicles as one of the most significant safety issues in the public transit industry. Distracted pedestrians and cyclists were also cited as problematic. Although transit agencies have been successful with bus operator training, the application of various technologies, and internal safety promotion programs, they report that awareness education of the public is an ongoing challenge. A number of the case example agencies provided summaries of public outreach and education programs that have been successful for them. The use of telemetry-based DMSs was reported as successful by the agencies that use these systems. However, in the interview with Jacksonville Transportation Authority, representatives said that these systems are expensive, which may be a limiting factor for small and rural transit providers. A similar comment was made by representatives from Lane Transit District (LTD), who said that because of the propriety nature of these systems, access to information gathered and video recordings could be cost-prohibitive. The literature review identified challenges associated with pedestrian detection systems, such as balancing the cost and accuracy of different types of pedestrian scanners and public resistance to the additional cameras stationed in these areas, which raise concerns related to privacy issues (Burka et al. 2014). A reported challenge with audible retrofit safety packages implemented to reduce pedestrian and bicycle collisions is the high rate of false warnings resulting from global positioning system (GPS) and detector limitations (Valentine et al. 2014). For transit agencies in the literature review and those in the case examples, evaluating the effectiveness of a specific mitigation measure is challenging. Without exception, the agencies report comprehensive and multi-focused methods and strategies for managing safety, including the implementation of targeted mitigation measures. Unfortunately, these methods and strategies are often undertaken concurrently or within a time frame that does not allow agencies to establish with certainty that one method or strategy contributed more than another to improved safety. The programs examined and described in the case examples have been successful as a result of multi-pronged or multifaceted coordinated efforts to address transit safety. None of the representatives interviewed for the case examples identified a single method that led to improved safety in their agencies. Strategies such as increased or modified operator training, technology applications, infrastructure modifications, and safety campaigns and promotions were often implemented together. Thus, it was difficult to judge the success of any one strategy in reducing transit incidents. Lessons learned in reference to technology solutions to improve bus transit safety cover a broad spectrum of best practices. One commonality among all technology-based solutions available to improve transit bus safety is the way in which these systems support a more holistic approach to incident investigations. This factor was identified in the literature review and during case example interviews. Consensus exists that incidents are not typically the result of one action or one design but rather a combination of causal or contributing factors. Technology applications and the tools they provide have proved effective in promoting a better understanding of events that have occurred, as well as behaviours that could cause or contribute to future events. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority addressed the importance of working closely with members of the labour union in implementing new programs, procedures, and technology applications. The agency attributes much of its success using a DMS to the acceptance of the technology by bus operators, which was the result of constant communication with the local Amalgamated Transit Union before, during, and after the implementation of the program. The critical importance of union engagement was also expressed by LTD representatives who participated in the interview process. For transit agencies considering the implementation of safety programs, including technology applications, LTD staff also strongly advised that if an agency is going to institute a program, communication with the union should begin sooner rather than later. They further emphasized the importance of giving the program a sufficient trial period, adopting a “being in it for the long run” mentality, avoiding programs that are overly punitive, and consistently delivering a message that reminds employees “why we're doing this and what the costs are if we don't.” LTD representatives also suggested that the agency’s success was highly dependent on their human resources director, who meets regularly with union leadership, fostering relationships based on inclusiveness and transparency. Lessons learned in reference to incentive programs and rewards reveal that success depends on using them in conjunction with an existing safety program. As tools to improve transit bus safety, incentives can raise awareness of an agency’s commitment to safety; although interviewees stressed that this commitment must be established in the safety management plan prior to initiating any type of incentive program. When used in conjunction with a safety management plan, incentive programs–especially those implemented with management support–have been successful in improving the safety of the system. They have also improved morale and employee-employer relationships by increasing the focus on positive behaviour. A number of case example interviewees noted that the evolution of the safety management system (SMS) framework in the public transit industry will probably make it more difficult to evaluate the success of one mitigation strategy over others. System approaches to eliminate or reduce the likelihood of systemic safety failures will become the norm in this environment. Establishing the efficacy of individual strategies will likely require evaluations within controlled environments. Case example participants agreed that the progress toward a mature SMS framework in their agencies and across the country would lend itself to an overall reduction in transit safety risks. The minimal use or recent addition of simulators for bus transit operator training is reflected in the lack of quantitative data available for an analysis to determine their effectiveness in improving transit safety. Future longitudinal research, with more data points available for analysis, will likely produce statistically significant results on the effectiveness of simulator training (Reep et al. 2013). The actions of other drivers that result in collisions with transit buses are a critical point that must be addressed. Research could be conducted to evaluate public outreach programs and other strategies designed and implemented to increase the awareness of the public (drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists), cautioning them on the dangers of distraction and factors that contribute to collisions with transit buses. The use of telemetry-based DMSs continues to increase, and the tools available to agencies that have installed these systems are reported to be highly valuable in increasing overall transit safety through the reduction of safety risks. The availability of data on close calls and near misses, aggressive manoeuvring and braking, and seatbelt use (coupled with the highly effective use of videos from these systems) was regarded as central to the success of the case example agencies that used DMSs. An independent assessment of telemetry-based DMSs would be valuable to evaluate the effectiveness of these systems in reducing safety risks and improving driving behaviour. (Author/publisher)
Samenvatting