Document JVL27x3ezqOQnOwo0GXDN182

414 Twenty-first Congress--Katifual Safety Council due t'* piiitTal buim>? c'*iiditim>. Many of tltcse trespassers are pood citizens who are going from mc cummmuty to another seeking employment. I'eopJe us a whole d>> u-`t see il<c railroad tre>jias5 situation from tlie standpoint that those of us who are interested in safety do. They see no harm in a man petting a ride <*n a freight train irotit mt point to anotlter. feeling ttat the railroad has lost nothing through -uch c<mdttrt. Titry do rvit seem to realize that tlte railroads* jriuci'ijl xiuitight irt cltmmatme the trr>|a*>er is from a safety standjohn. and I believe that this C'ciditi'in is n*! *nly prevalent among the public who are non-railroaders. Ins it i> <ihc prevalent aromic tin- rank and file of railroad employees. There is also a malicv-u* iuizard. however, as we know from ex]*eriencc. Tlw average illegal train rider i- n><t familiar with railroad safely devices. and lie j-U.ee> hiin-rli in jnqiardv rutnimially wlten he is *n a tram. We have )tad many injuriv? t*- m*-p*.u*vr>. >`*.ih* nt them fatal, due solely v> the iact that they tk not ktvov wiiat i- a >a:r practice ad what :> not a safe practice around tlie iretclit train. Thry rih uti t<! 1*-*\ car*, are injured by coming in contact with overhead struc ture*. and they attempt t* pet tm and off trains when they are moving loo last. Tl* adult is much harder to reach in nutters of tliis sort than tlte juvenile. I believe that we have had > <mr success on tlte Baltimore and Ohio, as tar as the juvenile is o*nrenird. Thr p|N.nunity to reach him is somewhat different. It is ocr l*nicy when a chiM maud . iur right of way t*> secure his name and address and thr name <r r.umlwr of the *chtui\ that he attend*. H tlte child lives within a reas-cnaMc dbtanrr **i tlw railroad. the officer is instructed to take him home and to advise hi? parents tliat lie lu> Iren found m railroad projrrty and tlte dancer of such tr>)ia?cing. Thr vi>tt >i the officer to tlte home is iol1*wed i|> l>y a letter iron: the Division Head to the parent?. and this letter not only gives tlte facts about tlw trestussinp. btrt explains in sKttc detail the danger which the child has incurred hy trinp am<ur the tracks <*n the right-of-way. The letter also asks for the co-operation of the ?trrnts in keeping the child off <>i railroad prnjierty. and encloses to tlte parents some literature that will help to impress upon the mind nt tlte boy wlvat might Ivanriv to him cm bii-y railroad pnjrrfv. Another communicari'rtJ is addressed to thr priuriiaf thr *-. *.l which the child attends, advising th-i principal oi tlie fact that the child iu Ucti ic::n\ trestiawng ii railriad jirojrrty and requesting his cooperation also, in rxplaming v> tlte child tlw danger of such jiractice. Wr find ilsat cutmmmicaiiun* addressed to thr princi'lttls of schools arc acted upon wry favorably. Tlie principal call? the child who offends to his office and endeavors t" :mpre>*. uj*on him tlie danger that he places himself m when playing around the railroad. Quite frequently. also, the t*arents of children are pleased to hear irom us and >o t'vpro* themselves. We have lad many letters from such parents in which thry thank^l u? siturrely i*r <mr riTortf to krrj* the l*oy out of danger and have de-crtWd their home methods oi di*rfilme and instruction. Uniformity in Defining and Reporting Accidents By DR. M. 0. LORENZ Director. Bureau of Statistics, Interstate Commerce Commission, Washington, D. C. .Thr -peaker said in jari: We have a lx>ok of rules ior reluming strain railway acri*k~.f which Iui> lieen in force since 1922 and. generally speaking, wc fuve a uniform observance <f those rule? among all railways. The only question is a? to the degree oi variation in applying the rules in certain details to the officers; oi the various reporting companies. As to fatalities. 1 think we luvc practically complete tmiiwnnity and reliability. The Claims Department may lianJle more <k*aih claim? llum tlie number of fataliiirs reported m the Interstate t'omtrertv t\immi??ion. l*ut wlicn account is taken oi the number oi persons dying Safety Section, -4.R..4.--Steam Ruilroad Section, N.S.C. 415 after -4 hours following injury, these tiring reporti`d to us separately as "suhsejuent fatalities," and of the cases not arising trotu live iicrutto <x{ a railway and hence not reportable, it probably will lie immd iltat wc arc getting complete reports oi fatal railway accidents on a uniform basis from railways in the United States. Bert it is not so dear in the matter oi injuries. The interpretation of the three-day mlt- is not uniform. It is true, we have issued instructions regarding the jirecise way iu which the counting of the 5-dayj shall begin and end. That is not where if>e primary difficulty lies. It is in the variation in practice in getting people hack t work promptly and in the interpretation ot the phrase 'sufficient to incapacitate him from performing his ordinary duties tor more than three days.** 7n <i(tr mteriirctatimi tit doulm'al cases, wc Itave regarded some instances as mt re|^>rtable where tlie victim was able to follow his regutar occu|atkio within tlirre days but with the assignment oi somewltat lighter duties. Possibly we should make h clearer that wc mean that the employee should l*e able to go through the same kind oi tuottom that were periormed prior to *hc accident l*v that particular empWee. Tins would take smite ficxiliility out of the rule and lead to greater uniformity. Where a mans assignment on his return to work is changed for other reasons titan lus physical condition, the determination oi reportaliitily would, of course, de/iend n the doctor's opinion as to whetlier he could reasonably have been assigned to the previous activity. U is true, if all railways are doing this to an equal degree, there would be a lack f uniformity not among roods, but merely as between the totals for presort and past years. But probably this incentive to restrict rqmrts to a minimum has not affected all roads to an equal degree because some managements are donbtJcss more enthusiastic ahont safety contests than others, `litis disturbing factor in our statistics will m the end prove beneficial in leading to mure exact study of what should he a rejcrtable accident. The lack of comparability m tlte annual totals for various years will be temporary and will come to an end when all road* have Rime as iar as they can or want to go m getting people hack to work promptly. I do not wish to Ik* misunderstood m inferring that the marked reduction in injuries shown hy the statistics in Tecent years is all a fiction. On the contrary, there has Urn a striking improvement, as shown In* the fatal accident rate which I consider accurate. The timr.lwr of employees killed per million man-hoars in tlte prosperous year 19Z was 3R4 cttupaml with JOfl in the most recent prosperous year. 1929. In 19.11 the figure was down to 212 Apjiarcmly the mdusirial depression nas reduced arciilcnt* more than iit pnqiortion to tlie decline in employment, lor the reduction from .V>8 to 2t2 can hardly all he due to safety efforts in .two years. Other factors to consider in intri-preting the decline in the ratio of injured to killed are. <T) that better surgical care tends to prevent trivial injuries irom becom ing -errinu? enough to f.r reported, and (2) that in recent years the intensive work on safety in shop*, where fatalities are relatively few. would tend to reduce injuries tibrre than fatalities in the grand total nir all employees. From 1888 to 1924 there was a tendency for the ratio of injuries to fatalities to increase. It was ajiproximanlv in to 1 in 1RBS. lfi in 1900. 28 in 1910. 58 m 1920. and 81 in 1924. Tlte 3-day rule was not cltangcd in that period. Possibly the explanation is that the prepomlrrant safety effort to prevent casualties iu connection with train and car move ments reduced the deaths more than the injuries in the grand total for all employees. <3cc injuries are relatively fewer in such accidents. Also, injuries may have been incompletely reported before 1915. Whatever tlte relative importance oi these various tartors inay he in affecting the comparability of the total casualty rate in railway accident statistics fmm year to year. I think wc are getting more nearly accurate report# than ever before because of the close attention that is given to what is a reportable accident. I know that safety officials are earnestly seeking the facts and 1 think they will accept the responsibility of putting uniformity and reliability of the reports above suspicion.