‘Great Crash Rash of ‘86’ : RTD Statistics Say Buses Are Safer but the Public and the Drivers Say That’s Not the Whole Picture

It could go down as the “Great Crash Rash of ‘86,” a bizarre period when seemingly every Southern California Rapid Transit district bus appears destined to flip over, be clobbered by an oncoming train or slam into cars in a busy intersection.

RTD buses were involved in just such a succession of crashes in recent weeks, resulting in 41 injuries. More than 100 more passengers were hurt in a dozen other RTD bus crashes dating back to March 14. Adding to the concern were post-accident disclosures that some of the drivers may have been on drugs. Three of those drivers were fired, one of whom has since been reinstated.

For weeks, the RTD has been besieged by questions about its safety practices and whether it is doing enough to clean up drug abuse. RTD officials acknowledge a high degree of public alarm and grudgingly concede that drugs are a problem, albeit a “slight” one. They insist, however, that by all statistical measures, the transit system has actually been getting safer.

A Times examination of RTD’s record found that, purely as a matter of statistical probability, the chances of a passenger either sustaining a serious injury or even being on a bus at the time of a major accident are indeed slim.

But a close look also raises questions about whether RTD will be capable of sustaining its self-derived safety record--or whether more embarrassing, life-threatening crackups lie in its future, like that of July 31 when a trainee driver turned over her loaded vehicle in the middle of the Hollywood Freeway, injuring 27 passengers.

In interviews with scores of RTD officials, drivers, passengers, safety experts, legislators and health experts, a host of factors affecting bus safety came to light that most agreed the district cannot afford to ignore.

These factors include tired, stressed and alienated drivers who complain that they are the public’s “favorite whipping boys.” They include a self-regulated bureaucracy that escapes most of the outside vigilance that zeros in, for instance, on school bus operations. And the factors include an acute driver shortage--now being corrected--that followed a severe miscalculation of ridership loss when RTD fares were raised last year.

Decline in Accidents

Based on its own statistics, the district points to an overall decline in accidents in recent years. RTD figures show a drop from 4.9 to 4.4 accidents per 100,000 miles between mid-1985 and mid-1986, although about a dozen RTD buses are in mostly minor accidents each day. Recently, the district self-determined that only about 16%, (720 of 4,559) of last year’s accidents were “avoidable.” The rest were deemed to be someone else’s fault or were considered “unavoidable” due to traffic or weather conditions, according to the district.

RTD’s districtwide figures, however, do not reflect the accident picture on the 10 most heavily traveled lines, which carry 30% of the system’s passengers. On those downtown area runs, there was an average of 6.4 accidents per 100,000 miles during the period when it was 4.4 for the entire district.

Line 207, the district’s fourth busiest, recorded the highest accident rate--9.2 accidents per 100,000 miles--among the top 10 lines, with 102 accidents last year. The busiest line, the No. 20 along Wilshire Boulevard--a single line that takes on more passengers than the entire Long Beach Transit system--had 171 accidents for the year, a rate of 5.6 per 100,000 miles.

Mechanical breakdowns, meanwhile, although occurring at a 100-a-day pace in a system that serves five counties, nevertheless were blamed for only four crashes last year.

Overall accident records notwithstanding, the RTD is feeling intense public pressure both in the district’s main office and on the streets. Drivers are bitterly reporting increasing verbal abuse by passengers, with most of the insults about drug use.

Of all the crashes in the recent series, the one that first caused a major media stir occurred on May 12 and involved an RTD bus driven by Vivian Lee Harris rear-ending another at a downtown bus stop, injuring 23 passengers. Harris, 37, later tested positive for drugs, specifically cocaine, and was fired.

Another driver who tested positive for marijuana after a May 30 crash in Studio City, causing 26 passenger injuries, also was fired. That driver was later reinstated under a union contract provision that prohibited outright dismissal based solely on marijuana use.

This week, the RTD board will consider imposing unannounced mandatory drug testing of all district employees, even though only 43 workers, about half of them drivers, were fired last year for drug abuse. The board acted only after publicly playing down the spate of multiple-injury accidents.

For weeks after the first drug-related crash was publicized, the district had touted its safety record, proudly pointing to its nationally recognized driver training program, its enforcement of hundreds of safety rules and its drug- and alcohol-abuse program. Employees suspected, for example, of drug use are subjected to mandatory tests and, if necessary, taken off duty and professionally counseled.

No counseled driver is returned to duty until his abuse problem is resolved, the district said, and officials said that drug abuse among RTD personnel is less than one half of one percent, a frequency they consider minimal.

But when it became clear that the public was not satisfied with the district’s defense of its drug policies and safety practices--particularly after several more multiple-injury crashes--the RTD began a frantic search for explanations for the spate of accidents. The RTD board brought in a panel of outside experts handpicked by General Manager John Dyer to conduct a safety study.

No Shortage of Reasons

Meanwhile, district officials remain puzzled, noting that no common thread seems to link the recent mishaps.

Could it be just a case of bad luck?

“I hate like hell to hang my hat on luck,” responded Ed Nash, RTD transportation director. “We’re a professional organization and we’re not a ‘lucky’ organization. I believe there is a cause and effect (but) we haven’t determined a pattern, a trend or a cause.

“Until we do, there isn’t anybody on my staff who’s going to rest until we come up with an answer,” he said, adding with clear frustration, “Somehow there’s a lack of concentration. What else could it be? If (the drivers) were concentrating . . . they wouldn’t be getting into these situations. I don’t have an answer; I wish I did.”

If lack of concentration is a problem, there is no shortage of possible reasons offered for it, particularly from the drivers.

From rookies to veterans who began their service with the old Red Car trolley line in the 1940s, drivers complain that in recent years they are under more pressure to meet tighter schedules with heavier loads that include more dangerous and demanding passengers. This leads to the type of intense stress that for years has been a problem with urban bus drivers worldwide, according to independent studies.

High blood pressure, hypertension and urinary problems are common laments among drivers who--although professing affection for their relatively well-paying jobs--nevertheless said that they are constantly fearful that they will be attacked by their passengers. Anxiety also stems from the knowledge that one of the RTD’s undercover spotters--the drivers call them “spies”--may be sitting nearby to check for adherence to the more than 2,000 rules enforced by the district.

“The whole system thinks we’re trash. . . ,” said one 17-year veteran driver. “If (RTD management) could give the operator a little bit of respect . . . out of 4,800 operators (the number is now 5,183), 4,300 love people and love driving, and their whole attitude would change.”

Driver fatigue, at least in recent months, has been another source of stress, and may account for many a future accident, several drivers said. Drivers said they either have volunteered to work as many as 70 hours a week or, under a union contract provision, been ordered to drive on their days off. It is not uncommon for drivers to work two or more weeks consecutively without a day off.

The major reason cited by management and drivers alike for all this extra work is a hiring freeze imposed last year after minimum bus fares rose from 50 cents to 85 cents. RTD officials had anticipated a 17.5% decline in the number of riders, but the falloff was only 9.5%. Before the district began increasing its driver roster earlier this year, it was at least 150 drivers short.

To fill the void until new drivers could be trained, the RTD ordered as many as 500 drivers a week to work on their days off and hundreds more volunteered for the overtime. While district officials said that they no longer order drivers to work a seventh consecutive day, union chief Earl Clark vowed to make sure that they do not by eliminating the practice from the next contract.

Clark said the union permitted involuntary overtime during severe periods of driver shortage. But from now on, he said, the district “is not going to have the prerogative of forcing people to work seven days a week.”

RTD safety director Joseph Reyes said there were not many cases last year in which a driver who had been on duty for more than eight hours was involved in an accident. But RTD officials said they could not say how many of the accidents involved drivers who had worked more than five days straight.

A Times analysis of the available RTD accident data, however, shows that 10% of the crashes in 1985 and 1986 involved drivers who had been on duty for at least eight hours when the accident occurred. More than a dozen of those had been on the job 11 hours or more; two had worked 13 hours.

The same percentage applied to those accidents considered “avoidable.” The most common type of such accident involving drivers with eight-hours-plus duty were those in which their buses struck a stationary object such as a light post or a telephone pole.

Reyes emphasized that a driver might be on duty for eight hours without actually having that much “seat time” driving the bus. He explained that a driver spends much of the day waiting until the afternoon rush hours. Reyes added that most drivers who work more than five days have volunteered for the extra duty.

RTD has adopted a 10-hour-per day limit, that by law applies to interstate commerce bus operations such as Greyhound’s, but have no policies against drivers working an indefinite number of days.

In fact, most of the large transit districts checked by The Times have overtime policies similar to the RTD’s. Some, however, set limits. San Diego Transit requires a driver to take a day off after six days, while the Massachusetts Bay Authority in Boston prohibits any driver working more than 20 hours overtime a week, among 10 districts contacted.

RTD officials, such as transportation director Nash, are openly skeptical that drivers who work more than five consecutive days pose a safety problem. He said that he hears about drivers working 70-hour weeks, but does not know any. Nash added, however, that he has heard of drivers who have made $50,000 or more a year.

For a veteran driver to have made $50,000 last year, he would have had to have worked an average of 63 hours a week.

Nash said that largely because of recent criticism of the RTD, the district is studying whether it should impose a seven-day limit on the number of consecutive days worked.

Health experts, meanwhile, generally agree that driving for days without rest is unsafe, although the medical evidence of the hazard is scanty. Studies have consistently warned against driving more than 10 hours a day, but no similar research has been conducted on consecutive-day dangers.

Dr. June Fisher of San Francisco General Hospital said that stress can affect reaction time to the point where a bus driver without at least one day off after five days could be asking for trouble. She added that she was reluctant to generalize, but added:

“If you have people working four weeks without a day off, I wouldn’t want to be on that bus.” Fisher has studied driving conditions for years, and her hospital unit treats San Francisco municipal bus drivers.

Their stress is compounded, RTD drivers said, by a lack of personal time at the end of their runs to go to the bathroom, smoke a cigarette or drink a cup of coffee before they must start their return trips. Drivers sometimes carry emergency bottles in which to urinate after their runs are completed. Other drivers admit to passing up passenger stops, speeding or running yellow lights in order to salvage some of their “recovery” time, which is supposed to be 10% of the run time.

‘Not a Safe Schedule’

“We’re asked to drive a schedule that is not a safe schedule,” said Dale Johnson, 60, a district driver since 1947 who because of seniority now works the relatively easy No. 265 line from Lakewood Mall to Cerritos Mall. “We have to over-drive. It’s just plain faster than it was four years ago. When you get to the end of the line, you should have time to go to the restroom. . . .”

RTD’s Reyes said all drivers are told that if they are running behind schedule due to heavy passenger loads or traffic congestion, they should report that and adjustments will be made. Drivers counter that--while not told to speed--that any delay is deducted from their recovery time before the return trip.

Reyes added that the RTD also has identified hundreds of restrooms where drivers can stop, adding that there is no excuse for a driver using a bottle.

Overcrowded buses and tight schedules also were cited in interviews as factors that may have directly or indirectly contributed to past RTD accidents.

Due to mechanical breakdowns and the shortage of drivers, the RTD in recent months has canceled hundreds of runs on some of the system’s busiest lines. These cancellations caused some standing-room-only loads that drivers said slowed them down between stops and eventually forced them to try to make up for lost time by speeding.

The district said it cannot assess how crowded buses may be affecting safety, but did report that 1,652 passengers sustained “non-collision injuries” last year, many of which were to passengers losing their balance while standing in crowded buses.

Missing Some Things

The “fast” schedules, drivers said, fail to include such things as unanticipated wheelchair lifts that can take up to five minutes each, long lines of passengers boarding and exiting the buses--particularly on the busier lines, and traffic congestion.

“You see what they’re doing,” one 14-year veteran driver explained with undisguised sarcasm. “They get a map; they put a string on it (between locations)--so many miles, so many minutes.”

RTD’s Nash said the adequacy of bus schedules is analyzed once a year. He added that during a year when drivers identify a particularly busy line, steps are taken where possible to add more buses.

But with a shrug, Nash said that when more buses are added, the riders “finesse us,” and spread the word that “a fast way to get downtown” is to switch to the new beefed-up lines. Eventually, Nash said, the overloading the RTD had tried to alleviate returns.

Nash and other RTD officials said that safety is emphasized from the moment prospective drivers receive their pre-employment physical exams to the final time a veteran driver cleans out his locker upon retirement.

Called ‘Brainwashing’

They point to a 14-day, 105-hour training course that includes a strong push--one driver groused that it was more like “brainwashing”--to learn safety rules, bus operations, passenger relations and even what to do during an on-bus robbery. A trainee then spends several more weeks learning the various routes with a line instructor before going solo.

“I would consider the RTD training program among the best there are,” said Don Dzinski, safety director of the American Public Transit Assn. “I’ve come to them for advice. . . . We know they are up on the upper scale, keeping in mind there is no way to quantify that statement.” (Dzinski’s comments were made before he agreed to examine the district’s safety practices as a member of Dyer’s outside panel.)

While it is held up as a model for other transit agencies, the training program nevertheless insulates trainees from many of the harsh realities they will face later. Because of entrenched union contract agreements, new drivers draw the least desirable assignments, many of them in high-crime areas.

“Some of the new operators get out there and you can hear them (over the radio) in tears,” said Nash, RTD’s transportation director. “They say, ‘I can’t go any further. . . . I just had two people get on and because I was late, they called me a dope head and what am I doing sniffing ‘coke’.”

The RTD training program is not governed by any comprehensive state or federal standards. The state Department of Motor Vehicles authorizes transit districts to certify their own drivers. The RTD’s basic requirements follow those set down in California law: A driver must have a Class II operator’s license and a medical certificate renewable every two years. RTD prospects also are given a background check and take a written test.

Almost Total Autonomy

Driver certification by the district is only one example of the RTD’s almost total autonomy from either state or federal regulations. Neither the federal Urban Mass Transit Administration nor the state exercises any authority over RTD operations despite funneling millions of dollars each year to the district.

State and federal officials justify their hands-off stance by explaining that it is in the RTD’s best interests to maintain a safe operation. But not all safety officials agree.

“There is an incredible void in the regulatory system. Nobody is out there who can come in and say, ‘You’re doing this wrong,’ ” said a National Transportation and Safety Board official familiar with the recent RTD accidents. The official asked not to be named.

In 1983, state Sen. John Seymour (R-Anaheim) tried to establish a DMV-controlled bus driver-certification program, but the legislation was strongly opposed by transit drivers who forced amendments limiting the bill to hazardous waste haulers.

“The unions came to me and said, in essence, ‘We’re going to kill your bill if you don’t accept these amendments,’ ” Seymour recalled. “I counted the votes and they were right.”

Mood May Be Changing

But since the recent RTD accidents, the mood in Sacramento may be changing. Assembly Transportation Committee Chairman Richard Katz, (D-Sepulveda), said he is considering lumping transit district drivers into his pending bill to strengthen regulations governing charter carriers. The charter bus bill was triggered by the Mono County tragedy on May 30 in which 21 elderly Santa Monica residents died in a chartered bus that plunged into the Walker River.

“It’s becoming painstakingly clear that (the RTD) has a problem,” Katz said.

Katz said he will also consider a bill directing the DMV to more closely monitor the driving records of transit bus drivers. Since 1982, the DMV has furnished regular driver records to the RTD under a voluntary program, but both RTD and DMV officials admitted that the program is not always reliable.

The RTD has no clear policy toward drivers with spotty driving records, according to Nash, the transportation director.

“(A ticket) just means we have to look at the guy,” he said, “that it’s not an isolated case and could be a trend. That’s all I can use it for.” Under state law, a bus driver may lose his license if he has accumulated six violation points in a single year, eight in two years or 10 in three. Regular motorists may receive only two fewer per year.

Exactly how well RTD drivers adhere to traffic laws is unclear. The Times formally requested a list of drivers’ names and license numbers, but RTD attorneys, after initially agreeing to the request, changed their minds, saying that the drivers’ union had objected. Last week, RTD asked the courts to decide the issue.

CHP Spot-Checks

The lack of regulation also extends to buses. While state law requires the California Highway Patrol to inspect all school buses annually, the CHP merely spot-checks about 5% of the RTD’s buses every 13 months.

Earlier this year, the CHP randomly inspected 100 of the district’s 2,100 buses at 10 of the district’s 12 terminals. Buses at nine of the terminals passed inspection, but those at the one in Carson flunked on two separate visits, with half of the inspected buses failing to meet safety standards. But even if the problem had been more widespread, the CHP lacks the same type of authority to shut down RTD operations that it now has with charter bus companies.

“It’s not really our program to trouble-shoot for the carrier . . . it’s a quality control check to see that he’s doing the job that he’s already required to do,” explained Dave English of the CHP’s motor carrier safety unit. “We call it voluntary compliance.” English said it would take two full-time inspectors to inspect all of the RTD’s buses each year.

Contributing to this article were Times researchers Tracy Thomas and Cecilia Rasmussen.

RTD ACCIDENTS

Of the recent rash of accidents involving its buses, the Southern California Rapid Transit District (RTD) counters that its accident record has remained stable for the last several years. These RTD figures compare accidents over the last six years.

YEAR ACCIDENTS RIDERSHIP (IN MILLIONS) ALL ACCIDENTS DEATHS COLLISION OTHER INJURIES* INJURIES** 1980-81 5,462 12 3,170 2,849 385.1 1981-82 4,840 12 2,837 2,371 353.0 1982-83 5,140 16 2,459 1,668 415.9 1983-84 5,645 15 2,673 1,703 465.6 1984-85 5,386 15 2,592 1,652 497.2 1985-86 4,559 NA NA NA 450.4

YEAR MILEAGE ACCIDENTS/ (IN MILLIONS) 100,000 MILES 1980-81 104.5 5.2 1981-82 106.7 4.5 1982-83 104.5 4.9 1983-84 109.9 5.1 1984-85 109.5 4.9 1985-86 105.0 4.4

*Injuries reported by passengers, pedestrians or motorists following a collision involving an RTD bus. **Injuries reported mostly by passengers, while boarding, exiting or riding the bus. In the latter case, a bus they were riding in may have swerved to avoid a collision and the passenger is hurt. Ridership is calculated by the number of boardings and does not accurately reflect the actual number of people riding the bus. ACCIDENTS ON RTD ROUTES

Accident rates on the 10 busiest of the RTD’s 220 bus lines all run higher than the district-wide average of 4.4 accidents per 100,000 miles. The 10 lines carry 30% of the district’s ridership and in 1985-86 accounted for 1,098, or 24%, of RTD’s total 4,559 accidents.

MILEAGE DAILY 1985-86 ACCIDENTS/ LINE ROUTE PER YEAR BOARDINGS ACCIDENTS 100,000 MILES 20 Wilshire Blvd 3,031,725 66,590 171 5.6 204 Vermont Ave. 1,700,204 61,566 125 7.4 30 Pico-1st St. 1,557,309 50,865 131 8.4 207 Western Ave. 1,103,597 41,431 102 9.2 4 S. Monica Blvd. 2,024,404 40,321 117 5.8 40 LA-Hawthorne 1,544,970 36,016 97 6.3 14 Beverly Blvd 1,253,889 35,519 74 5.9 60 LA-Long Beach 1,964,093 33,727 117 6.0 33 Venice Blvd 1,609,328 32,386 75 4.7 28 Olympic Blvd. 1,360,147 32,314 89 6.5

RTD AND OTHER TRANSIT SYSTEMS

Figures obtained by The Times from other transit systems shows how the RTD safety record compares. In some cases, figures reflect differing reporting methods among transit agencies.

LOCATION RIDERSHIP BUSES DRIVERS ACCIDENTS/ INJURED 100,000 MILES 1982-86 Los Angeles RTD 1.4 million 2,100 5,183 4.4 *7,624 Boston 440,000 1,400 2,141 7.7 NA Chicago 1.6 million 2,275 6,000 5.5 NA New York 1.7 million 3,781 9,021 NA **2,246 Oakland 250,000 850 1,450 7.0 6,521 Orange County 100,000 440 763 3.3 238 San Diego 85,000 284 520 3.8 455 San Francisco 725,000 547 *2,000 8.7 *461 Seattle 225,000 1,100 2,018 5.5 468 Washington, D.C. 445,000 1,600 2,510 4.0 NA

LOCATION DEATHS 1982-86 Los Angeles RTD *46 Boston NA Chicago NA New York **16 Oakland 15 Orange County 2 San Diego 1 San Francisco 6 Seattle 5 Washington, D.C. NA

Ridership figures reflect daily boardings, not actual riders. * Include no injuries or deaths for period from July 1, 1985 to June 30, 1986. ** Include no injuries or deaths for 1982 and 1983.