Need for Speed? Safety Isn’t Number One After All

From Maverick to Farquaad

If the title of Tuesday morning’s Senate Commerce, Science, & Transportation Subcommittee  hearing sounded familiar, that’s because it was pulled straight from the movie “Top Gun.”

The Need for Speed.

It’s the kind of phrase meant to evoke boldness, confidence, and daring leadership. The image is clear: Maverick pushing the throttle forward, embracing innovation, and leading America into the future.

That was exactly the tone Subcommittee Chairman Todd Young (R-Indiana) was trying to set as senators and industry executives discussed autonomous vehicles, artificial intelligence, and a technology-driven transportation system.

But for railroad workers watching the hearing, a different movie came to mind.

Instead of Maverick and Goose, the message sounded more like Lord Farquaad from “Shrek.”

If you have any kids or grandkids in your life, you remember the scene. Farquaad sends a group of loyal soldiers into mortal danger for his personal benefit and to benefit the rich and connected and declares, “Some of you may die, but it’s a sacrifice I am willing to make.”

The crowd cheers. The joke, of course, is that Farquaad isn’t the one taking the risk. With all due respect to Senator Young, the AAR, and all of the other cheerleaders at this hearing, we aren’t looking to die for your profit margin or your re-election chances.

“With All Due Respect, Mr. Dennit”

That is what made one exchange during the hearing so troubling.

While discussing the transition toward increasingly autonomous transportation systems, Sen. Young acknowledged there could be “high-profile” and “politically resonant” examples of “suboptimal outcomes” along the way, including incidents involving safety.

To a senator discussing technology policy, that may sound like a reasonable observation.

But to a railroader, the phrase “suboptimal outcomes” sounds like something else entirely: a derailment, a hazmat release, a serious injury.

Worst case scenario, it sounds like fatalities. And that gets to the heart of the divide exposed during the hearing.

Too Fast. Too Furious.

For the technology advocates, the conversation centered on the destination. The future. The promise of automation. The efficiencies that could be gained (AKA Operating Ratio).

For us, the railroad workers, the question is very simple.

Who pays the price during the journey?

Throughout the hearing, witness after witness spoke enthusiastically about accelerating technological deployment. The title itself, “The Need for Speed,” revealed the mindset. Move faster. Deploy faster. Adopt faster.

That may work in Silicon Valley’s “move fast and break things” culture, but it does not work in railroading.

The Baby Ruth in the Swimming Pool

When things break in our industry, people die. Every rule in the railroad rulebook exists because someone learned a lesson the hard way. Every safety regulation has a story behind it, usually a tragic one.

That is why the testimony from the only member of the labor community stood out. While industry leaders and some senators were cheering and celebrating technological progress and claiming railroads are operating in the safest era in history, Teamsters representative Cole Scandaglia stood out as the guy in the room who wasn’t on board with the pep rally.

He had already shocked those in attendance after saying that employees have reasons not to believe everything the company puts out about its safety culture. When he was pushed for an example of something the companies or “the regulated” have said that wasn’t true, Scandaglia challenged the senators on the committee. He told them to find a railroader in their district and ask them whether they feel they are working in the safest era of American railroading, like the AAR just testified.

Most railroaders already know the answer. Innovation is not the problem. Technology is not the problem.

The problem is an industry mindset that treats our safety as an obstacle to overcome rather than a responsibility to uphold.

And when the people pushing the future aren’t the same people bearing the risk, railroaders have every right to ask whether the destination is worth the cost of the journey.

SMART-TD isn’t looking to ruin the Hollywood images Chairman Young had going on today, but maybe he should remember that we’d rather the rail industry focus on troubleshooting Goose’s ejector seat before they worry about pushing the plane to hit Mach 10.

We’re tired of throwing our brothers and sisters’ dog tags into the ocean.