March 3, 2005

This week has seen another two serious traffic accidents on commuter routes to Los Alamos leaving one victim in critical condition. Any commute presents hazards; however, given the long history of reckless driving and the lack of enforcement, the daily ride to Los Alamos presents above-average risk. One does not have to be a "long-distance" commuter from Española or Albuquerque to be exposed to the hazard. Indeed, I am challenged almost daily on Pajarito Road by drivers passing at speeds well beyond the posted speed limit (55 mph). Yesterday, as one car was passing me (65-70 mph), another driver (85-95 mph) passed both of us forcing the first vehicle to cut quickly in front of me. Both of these vehicles were slowed by other traffic on the Pajarito "hill" so that within a a couple minutes I was behind both of them. The faster car turned into TA-46, the other into TA-55. By risking everyone's life, both inconsiderate employees made it to work approximately five seconds in front of me. What in that five second advantage justifies killing oneself or another driver? Does this careless attitude disregarding everyone's safety stay in the parking lot or is it carried into the workplace?

As this subject has been brought to the attention of Laboratory management, employees have been told, "Don't call us, call the police." As employees have expressed concern about the commute during snowstorms and the reluctance to call delays in the Laboratory's opening, they have been told, "If you don't like the conditions, stay home." Of course, stay home means taking a day of vacation.

As part of the Behavioral Excellence Safety Initiative, the Lab currently is implementing the Safety Training and Observation Program (STOP) based on what is perceived to be a successful model at DuPont. A visit to the DuPont Web site shows a video expressing the strong concern they have for their commuters' safety, which is integral to their safety program. DuPont obviously recognizes the commute for many employees is the most hazardous thing they do during the day and certainly represents a significant hazard for all employees.

So, my question is: will STOP be implemented at the Laboratory with the sincere attitude that it will become part of the Lab culture or will we pick-and-choose only those program elements that are convenient? It seems to me that dead is dead and it makes no difference if an employee is killed on the way to work or at the job site. An effective safety program should address and seek to mitigate all safety hazards related to the job, including the commute.

I propose a working group of Lab employees from all levels working with appropriate agencies to address the problem of commuter safety.

--David Carroll