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

expert_placeholder

7/22/2009· Accident Investigation & Reconstruction

Forensic Engineering Experts: Vehicle Accident Reconstruction

By: Dr. Irving Ojalvo

Motor vehicle accidents are the most common type of incidents producing injury in the US. The main issues in litigating automotive accidents involve vehicle speeds, seatbelt usage, airbag deployment, vehicle component failure (e.g. steering, braking), roadway design, occupant biomechanics, rollover, visibility, etc.

expert_placeholder

7/31/2009· Accident Investigation & Reconstruction

Forensic Engineering Experts: Computer Simulation

By: Dr. Irving Ojalvo

When an understanding of complex motions associated with various accidents is required, computer simulation is an invaluable tool, which allows the modeling and visualization of rollovers and collisions. In addition to vehicle accidents, computer simulation can also be used to create many other systems of masses and contacting surfaces, such as a toppling light pole after it has been struck.

expert_placeholder

7/31/2009· Accident Investigation & Reconstruction

Forensic Engineering Experts: Machine Guarding

By: Dr. Irving Ojalvo

The primary function of all guarding is to prevent an operator or bystander from being injured by a potentially dangerous portion of a machine. Often the hazard involves moving parts with the potential to cut, crush or draw-in body parts, although barrier guards may also be necessary when electrical, thermal or chemical dangers are present.

;
Experts.com-No broker Movie Ad
Unicourt Logo Button

Follow us

linkedin logo youtube logo rss feed logo