"Vissy Vests" system wide?

On my local CSX division the crews started wearing the high visibility vests in the last 6 months.

Is this a system wide thing on CSX now? or just division thing?

And the big question: is this a railroad thing or is this coming from the FRA?

T2

System wide.

Sounds like a federal thing, if you notice people with jobs that put them in similar situations ( highway construction workers, airport ramp workers, traffic cops, ect.) all wear hi-vis vests or shirts too. At least around here they do.

I'm actually suprised it took us so long to get them.

Not federal. Just a company thing. CN has them too. It's a safety issue. I heard they came about after someone was hit while walking along his train. No lantern, no radio, in the dark and was hit by a passing train.

I was informed by local management that it was a safety issue, caused by a rash of employees walking on the ground and being struck by vehicles due to poor visibility. MoW, Mech., Maintainers and other such vehicles are always driving around yards or along the r.o.w. where, employees of many types may be walking on the ground. Several incidents of employees getting struck by these vehicles prompted the safety vest issue for all employees working outside.

Company and Federal requirement. The vest issue stems from an of FRA reg shown below. Easier to have all workers in vests. Also a similar reg issued by DOT has any worker on a federal supported roadway needing a vest also including emergency responders.

24. Audible Warning from Trains:
§ 214.339
Section 214.339 requires audible
warning from locomotives before trains
approach roadway workers. The
implementation of this requirement will
necessitate railroad rules regarding
notification to trains that roadway
workers are on or about the track. This
notification could take the form of
portable whistle posts, train movement
authorities, or highly visible clothing to
identify roadway workers and increase
their visibility. This section is not
optional for a railroad, and FRA intends
that this provision covers the same
subject matter as that of any state or
local restrictions on the sounding of
locomotive whistles.

Hi Train2,
It has been a system wide requirement since the first quarter of this year. It is listed in System Bulletin 001The 2nd quarter 2010 reissue of System Bulletin items, section 3 item 3-1 Safeway Rule GS-6 changes. On the Employee Gayeway there is other approved clothing items other than the vests. T-Shirts, Rain Jacket, Polo Shirts, and Sweat Shirt. For the Summer I have the T-shirts and the Polo Shirts.
Regards,
Railman

railman616: admit it: you're not man enough to wear the high-viz boxer shorts!

railrob wrote:Company and Federal requirement. The vest issue stems from an of FRA reg shown below. Easier to have all workers in vests. Also a similar reg issued by DOT has any worker on a federal supported roadway needing a vest also including emergency responders.

24. Audible Warning from Trains:
§ 214.339
Section 214.339 requires audible
warning from locomotives before trains
approach roadway workers. The
implementation of this requirement will
necessitate railroad rules regarding
notification to trains that roadway
workers are on or about the track. This
notification could take the form of
portable whistle posts, train movement
authorities, or highly visible clothing to
identify roadway workers and increase
their visibility. This section is not
optional for a railroad, and FRA intends
that this provision covers the same
subject matter as that of any state or
local restrictions on the sounding of
locomotive whistles.

Yes, public safety (except for cops on patrol) have to wear them too...so we spend $100s to purchase fire-resistant coats only to have to wear highly flammable high visibility vests! My only gripe is that the feds can mandate all of this stuff to make everyone more visible, but with people texting, reading, driving impaired and god who-knows-what behind the wheel, people will still get hit!

The FRA rule is not new. "Roadway workers" ie: maintainers, MoW, Mechanical employees have been wearing HV vest and hardhats for years in compliance with this regulation. The new CSX rule requires a specific CSX HV vest or other approved CSX HV clothing, to be worn by (all) employees "working on or about tracks.". T&E and managment are not considered "roadway workers". This was a blanket rule by CSX due to safety issues which occured last year. Prsonally, I believe it's a good rule, which has been needed for years. Before this a CSX T & E employee wearing average clothing was very hard to identify and see. Particularly at night in big yards or along the RoW where "roadway workers" could be driving around inspecting trains, heading to maintainance issues and all. Several T & E employees were struck by vehicles over the past couple years. So for Security and Safety Issues. CSX requires the use of their specific HV clothing.

JDM864 wrote:

railrob wrote:Company and Federal requirement. The vest issue stems from an of FRA reg shown below. Easier to have all workers in vests. Also a similar reg issued by DOT has any worker on a federal supported roadway needing a vest also including emergency responders.

24. Audible Warning from Trains:
§ 214.339
Section 214.339 requires audible
warning from locomotives before trains
approach roadway workers. The
implementation of this requirement will
necessitate railroad rules regarding
notification to trains that roadway
workers are on or about the track. This
notification could take the form of
portable whistle posts, train movement
authorities, or highly visible clothing to
identify roadway workers and increase
their visibility. This section is not
optional for a railroad, and FRA intends
that this provision covers the same
subject matter as that of any state or
local restrictions on the sounding of
locomotive whistles.

Yes, public safety (except for cops on patrol) have to wear them too...so we spend $100s to purchase fire-resistant coats only to have to wear highly flammable high visibility vests! My only gripe is that the feds can mandate all of this stuff to make everyone more visible, but with people texting, reading, driving impaired and god who-knows-what behind the wheel, people will still get hit!

I take it that you missed the update to the mandate that states (paraphrasing) not to wear the highway vests in a situation that fire is present and the wearer is serving extinguishment duties, ie: a vehicle fire. And cops are also SUPPOSED to wear the high vis on traffic stops, but they look at it as not being a florescent target in some jerk-off's mirror that has intentions of shooting them as they approach the vehicle. I still see so many LEO's not wearing them during traffic control duties too though, which is dumb. I have the update at my normal station, but I won't be there until next week. I send you the exact wording offlist when I get back up there.

JDM864 wrote:

railrob wrote:Company and Federal requirement. The vest issue stems from an of FRA reg shown below. Easier to have all workers in vests. Also a similar reg issued by DOT has any worker on a federal supported roadway needing a vest also including emergency responders.

24. Audible Warning from Trains:
§ 214.339
Section 214.339 requires audible
warning from locomotives before trains
approach roadway workers. The
implementation of this requirement will
necessitate railroad rules regarding
notification to trains that roadway
workers are on or about the track. This
notification could take the form of
portable whistle posts, train movement
authorities, or highly visible clothing to
identify roadway workers and increase
their visibility. This section is not
optional for a railroad, and FRA intends
that this provision covers the same
subject matter as that of any state or
local restrictions on the sounding of
locomotive whistles.

Yes, public safety (except for cops on patrol) have to wear them too...so we spend $100s to purchase fire-resistant coats only to have to wear highly flammable high visibility vests! My only gripe is that the feds can mandate all of this stuff to make everyone more visible, but with people texting, reading, driving impaired and god who-knows-what behind the wheel, people will still get hit!

I am certain that in short order those who produce the fire-resistant apparel will be making a Hi-Viz line for you to purchase.

Another waste of $$, just like the stupid lights they put at clearance points and on switches.

As for the above post about a conductor getting struck while walking his train......even if he had a vest on the train was probably moving too quickly to avoid hitting him.

CSX Conductor wrote:Another waste of $$, just like the stupid lights they put at clearance points and on switches.

I noticed that last night at MANSFIELD, the Framingham Secondary had white LED's at the switch point and the switch stand. Do they change colors when the switch is not aligned for the main?

No. The LED lights began to be installed at Dewitt and Rochester in 2009. White, designated switch locations, Yellow, designated Tellow Tie/clearance points, and purple/blueish designated permanent derail locations. They have photocell/solar array on top to recharge internal batteries and turn of LEDs in daylight. And, yes, in the winter, they disappear under the snow.

Collinwood had them installed about 2 weeks ago, and I've heard Stanley has them as well.