banner ad
Experts Logo

articles

Schoolbus Crossing: Safety and Security Part 1

As Originally published by School Transportation News, July 2007.

By: Ned Einstein
Tel: 212-766-1121
Email Mr. Einstein


View Profile on Experts.com.


In the last installment (STN, Jun, 2007), I stressed the importance of distinguishing between an actual bus stop and the waiting area across the street from it in terms of safety. But the selection of the stop and waiting area also involves concerns for student security. Sometimes, there are trade-offs that must be made. These trade-off are often complex and subtle. But they must be made correctly.

Safety versus Security

Several years ago, as an expert witness, I helped defend a national schoolbus mega-contractor in a crossing case where a youngster prematurely stepped into the roadway and was struck by an automobile - before the bus was even in sight. Superficially, what happened could have been classified as a simple mistake - although there is little leeway in our legal system for genuine accidents.

Five elementary students lived deep in a rural subdivision served by a "collector" street which connected their neighborhood to an "arterial" street, or main road, to school. Traveling along the main road for years, these students' schoolbus passed them by on the opposite side of the street, turned around a few blocks further down, and 10 minutes later returned to the bus stop to pick them up on the side of the roadway on which they lived.

Because of their ages, the students' parents took turns driving them to the bus stop. They preferred to wait at the stop with them, but the extra 10 minutes it took the bus to turnaround made some parents late to work. In response, they asked the contractor to let these students catch the bus on the opposite side, and consistent with sound schoolbus industry safety practice, also agreed to keep them from crossing until the bus arrived. When the bus arrived, the code word employed by the parents to direct the crossing was "O.K."

On the last morning of this new era, two boys stood on the edge of the roadway facing traffic, while three girls faced the patch of woods behind them. One of the girls innocently asked her mother (the parent watching them that day according to the agreed-upon rotation) if she could "go over Sally's house" after school. Her Mom replied, "O.K." Overhearing this answer, and interpreting it as the signal to begin crossing, one of the boys instinctively stepped forward into the roadway and was immediately struck by a passing motorist. The schoolbus had not yet appeared. But as one might expect, its absence did not forestall the inevitable lawsuit.

The plaintiff's expert, a knowledgeable, well-known and career-long leader in the schoolbus community, argued that the contractor was negligent in granting these parents permission, since there was no genuine need for these students to cross at all because, 10 minutes later, the bus could pick them up on the side of the road on which they lived. As the defendant's expert, I was forced to agree with the plaintiff's expert that, all else equal, crossing the street was not as safe as not crossing the street. Judgment in favor of the plaintiff, correct? Not so fast. The next installment of this series will explain how the defendant walked away without paying a dime in damages. Stay tuned.


Ned Einstein is the President of Transportation Alternatives, a passenger transportation and automotive consortium engaged in consulting and forensic accident investigation and analysis (more than 600 cases). Specializes in elderly, disabled, schoolchildren. Mr. Einstein has been qualified as an Expert Witness in accident analysis, testimony and mediation in vehicle and pedestrian accidents involving transit, paratransit, schoolbus, motorcoach, special education, non-emergency medical transportation, taxi, shuttle, child transport systems and services...

©Copyright - All Rights Reserved

DO NOT REPRODUCE WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION BY AUTHOR.

Related articles

Mechanical-Safety-Engineering-Logo.gif

12/10/2014· Accident Investigation & Reconstruction

Forensic Clues: Fishing and Boating Accidents

By: John Ryan, BSME, PE

Fishing and boating accidents result in thousands of injuries each year. The U.S. Coast Guard reported 3331 injuries and 709 fatalities due to boating accidents on both recreational and commercial vessels. There are many causes for these accidents, including collisions with objects or other vessels, drowning, electrical and mechanical failures, interaction with unguarded machinery, and others. There are various acts and laws that govern accidents at sea. This issue of Forensic Clues will examine some of the preventable accidents caused by defective machinery and equipment that occur at sea, and a brief overview of the laws and regulations affecting product liability litigation related to maritime accidents.

technology_associates_logo.gif

7/31/2009· Accident Investigation & Reconstruction

Forensic Engineering Experts: Products Liability

By: Kristopher J. Seluga, PE

An end user of a product expects that a given product will not only function as intended, but will be safe from non-obvious hazards. Based upon decades of experience with mishaps during use of common and specialized equipment, thousands of standards have been developed for many consumer products and industrial equipment. Numerous organizations exist, e.g., ANSI, ASTM, SAE, and ASME, that regularly review and update these standards.

technology_associates_logo.gif

7/22/2009· Accident Investigation & Reconstruction

Forensic Engineering Experts: Trucks

By: Kristopher J. Seluga, PE

Heavy trucks, whether tractor-trailers, construction vehicles or garbage haulers, are involved in many serious traffic accidents due to their large weight, high centers of gravity, decreased visibility, poor handling and reduced braking efficiency. In addition, articulated tractor-trailers are subject to additional problems such as jack-knife and trailer sway instabilities.

;
Experts.com-No broker Movie Ad

Follow us

linkedin logo youtube logo rss feed logo
;