A CSX worker who found his friend run over by remote-control locomotives in a railyard last year suggests a simple solution to prevent similar deaths in the future: using two-person crews.
However, this idea may not be popular with railroads that have come to depend on single-person remote-control operations. This practice, which started in 2005 with two-person crews for safety, now often involves just one person controlling the trains.
Remote-control operations are cost-effective because they use less experienced workers for tasks that once required licensed, higher-paid engineers. Unions, including the Brotherhood of Locomotive Trainmen and Engineers, have expressed concerns, especially as remote-control trains are now used beyond railyards for local trips.
Railroads are confident in the safety of remote-control trains based on years of experience. Yet, the Federal Railroad Administration is reviewing their use following recent incidents, including the death of Fred Anderson on September 17, 2023. Anderson was killed in CSX’s Walbridge, Ohio, railyard when he stepped in front of two locomotives controlled remotely.
Railroad safety has gained attention since last year’s Norfolk Southern derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, which caused evacuations and health concerns due to toxic chemical spills.
At the time of Anderson’s death, the remote-control operator was riding a ladder on the back of the second locomotive and could not see the front. Although this practice is allowed, Anderson was still struck by the train. His colleague, George Oliger, believes a traditional crew or having the operator at the front of the locomotives might have prevented the accident by providing a warning.
Oliger suggests that spending $350 on an engineer for each crew could enhance safety and prevent such tragedies. He argues that a two-person crew could have averted the incident.
While it’s uncertain if anyone could have stopped the locomotives in time, having an operator who could see the tracks might have allowed for a warning. The locomotives were moving at 10 mph (16 kph) when they hit Anderson, and stopping them at that speed would have required the length of an engine.
Randy Fannon, head of the engineers’ union’s Safety Task Force, believes that having an engineer in the cab would have prevented this tragedy. He adds that the union is strongly against using remote-control trains outside fenced-in yard areas where pedestrians and vehicles might be at risk.
CSX and the unions involved cannot comment on Anderson’s death until the NTSB completes its investigation, which is examining CSX’s safety procedures. Following Anderson’s death, the Federal Railroad Administration and CSX issued advisories reminding workers to be cautious around tracks and to look both ways before crossing.
Despite these advisories, CSX stated last year that no changes to remote-control operations were planned, as all rules appeared to be followed. Safety statistics on railroad crashes do not specifically separate remote-control incidents from those involving traditional crews. The Brotherhood of Railway Carmen has reported three member deaths related to remote-control trains since 2015.