The proposed protection in general shall conform with the recommended standards of the Joint Committee on Grade-Crossing Protection of the Association of American Railroads, subject to such modifications as may be directed by this Commission.

The carriers affected shall install and maintain the protective devices.

What is he referring to?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. He is referring to the short arm gates and the flasher lights and that kind of thing.

Now we do not have a standard profile for a crossing because almost every crossing is different.

In the language that we would have there all we would say is get the best profile that is available in the area of the crossing. What they are speaking of for standards are the short arm gates and flasher lights and that type of protection.

Mr. SPRINGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Keith.

Mr. KEITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Just to correct an impression that I think you may possibly have created which I believe is wrong. You said that the various bodies are appointed by the State legislature or legislatures. I don't believe that is a fact. It is by the executive branches of Government rather than the legislative branches.

Mr. GOODFELLOW. All States are not the same. I guess it varies. The State I was in, the body was set up by the legislature. The members were appointed by the Governor.

Mr. KEITH. I thought your testimony said appointed by the State legislature.

Mr. GOODFELLOW. I think I did say that.

Mr. KEITH. It would be a little better if it was the executive branch responsibility, individual rather than collective.

You said in your statement that, "We fully agree with the National Transportation Safety Board statement where they report 'primary responsibility for railroad safety should rest on management and labor," and it is really up to the Congress and, I say, the executive branch to make certain that that responsibility is assumed, and that is the purpose of this legislation, I assume.

My questions have been to see what efforts the executive branch has made in drafting this legislation to make certain that the expertise in management and labor has been utilized.

Were you present when I questioned earlier witnesses on that?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. Yes; I am familiar with your questions and their

answers.

Mr. KEITH. Do you generally concur that there has not been very much done on the part of the executive branches so far as management, at least, is concerned in the drafting of this legislation?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. I certainly agree with him. I was at probably two-thirds of the meetings that were held to tell us that there was to be a bill and I concur with what our people said that we did not have very much to say about what went into the bill.

Mr. KEITH. What action have you taken as the chief executive of the Association of American Railroads to overcome this weakness in this development of which I spoke?

Did you initiate any correspondence to say things are going slowly, we have not heard from you, we feel that we should be consulted?

Or did you take any action insofar as labor was concerned to join forces with them to protect your joint interest?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. I can only say that I wrote no letters to either the Federal Railroad Administrator or the Secretary of Transportation, but I kept in very close touch with him and by telephone asked when we were going to see the bill. As you remember, our witnesses said, "We saw the bill when it came to the Congress.'

But as far as labor is concerned, we have high hopes, although we have had no real progress to report. We have a committee made up of five railroad presidents and five railroad labor union presidents. We have had three meetings and we have set ground rules, we have done some talking, we have discussed the various matters.

One of the things high on our agenda is safety, but I must say we have not come up with anything concrete yet as to how we shall approach the area of safety. But since Mr. Leighty invited us to meet with them, and we did meet with them, I have hopes that from this we can build cooperation and realize this responsibility of labor and management to get this safety matter controllable by us so that the Federal Government does not have to concern itself with it.

Mr. KEITH. When did you last meet? When did the committee last meet?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. The committee last met on the 24th of May.
Mr. KEITH. When, prior to that?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. April 11.

Mr. KEITH. When is your next scheduled meeting?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. The next scheduled meeting is the last Friday in July, whatever date that is.

Mr. KEITH. Would you say generally speaking that the committee's actions have been positive in nature?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. I think they have been very positive and I think they have been very fruitful.

These things do not go fast because this is an entirely new situation to have these men sitting down together.

Mr. KEITH. It is an entirely new situation?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. Yes.

Mr. KEITH. I think it is very encouraging that it is taking place. It is unfortunate that it did not exist earlier to face this problem.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Watson.

Mr. WATSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Goodfellow, I notice that on the first page of your statement you say that American railroad management is more deeply concerned than anyone else with all aspects of railroad safety.

Of course I would agree with you on that, both from a humane standpoint and from an economic standpoint, because, after all, you feel the impact of it. I know, as a country lawyer, you have made one of your railroads feel an economic impact in at least one case.

You are not implying by that statement that the brotherhoods are not equally concerned about safety because it is their lives and their interests that are so often involved.

So you would agree that the brotherhoods are equally concerned about safety, too?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. Yes, I would agree that they were equally concerned.

Mr. WATSON. Now on page 2, you say that, "We have had a great deal of experience in the safety field," and I think that is axiomatic. Inasmuch as your experience has not produced the results that the Department of Transportation desires, can you think of any other agency or any other individual other than the railroads and the brotherhoods that would have more expertise in this particular field?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. You mean any agency that would have more expertise than management and labor?

Mr. WATSON. Yes, in the field of safety.

Mr. GOODFELLOW. No, I can't see they would have any more expertise than we have and particularly that we have jointly with labor.

Mr. WATSON. Yes, but you failed. So we are going to have to set up a Federal agency now.

Where will they get the expertise to do the job? All your experts and the brotherhoods have failed and you are negligent.

Where is the Federal Government going to get the experts to do the job?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. I don't know. You have said we have failed. We do not believe we have failed. We are having some trouble with derailments.

I think you will remember that several of the witnesses said that derailments would not usually cause casualties, that they are measured only by dollars, $750 per accident.

So, the Department has used this to point the finger at the railroad management and say that they have to have this bill. We think it would be much better for labor and management and the Department of Transportation to sit down and help us find out how we can cut down on derailments.

We have people working on this full time at our research laboratory in Chicago and we know that we have this problem and it is brought about by many things. It is brought about mostly by technology but mostly because we have been designing equipment that we like to think of as customer-oriented.

Therefore, some of these long cars have given us trouble. Some of the cushion underframe couplers have given us trouble and caused derailments.

But we do not think because we have, in one facet of our safety, had some trouble in the last few years, caused by this difference in operation, we don't think this requires a complete all-encompassing safety bill such as this one.

To answer your question, I don't know where they are going to get any people that know any more about this than we do.

Mr. WATSON. I agree with you.

When you answered the question saying I had stated that you failed, I was just quoting the Secretary of Transportation who said you had failed. According to him, that is the reason for this legislation.

You say you have a railroad research safety center. I assume that it involves development of new equipment and also involves safety. Mr. GOODFELLOW. That is right.

Mr. WATSON. How many people do you have in that center and where is it located?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. It is located in Chicago on the campus of the Illinois Institute of Technology. We work very closely with the institute in our research and testing and development work.

We have pretty close to a hundred men working in this center on various projects. In some cases they run tests and in other cases they run development studies.

Mr. WATSON. So, in addition to your regular operations and your programs of safety, you have this general research center.

I am sure the benefits of its research would be available to all railroads, would they not?

Mr. GOODFELLOW. That is right, they are available.

Mr. WATSON. May I ask Mr. Moloney a question since he is a lawyer. Earlier I asked the Secretary of Transportation about what he would do in the event of employee negligence. He said they would be subject to a thousand dollar civil penalty.

I call your attention to page 6 of the bill, section 6. Would not the employee also be subject to the criminal provisions there where it says,

Any person who knowingly and wilfully violates any such provision shall be fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Would that penalty not apply to an employee as well as to a railroad officer or official?

Mr. MOLONEY. The way the bill is drawn, Mr. Watson, it will apply. We think if it should apply, it should apply to the offender on your criminal prosecution, the one who willfully violates the law.

Mr. WATSON. Not only willfully, Mr. Moloney, but according to this any person who knowingly.

Mr. MOLONEY. I assume that if he knowingly did it he probably would be doing it willfully.

Mr. WATSON. So these criminal penalties would apply to the employee as well as to any officers of the company?

Mr. MOLONEY. It would under the bill. Under the amendments proposed by labor neither the civil penalties nor the criminal penalties would apply to any employee or employee representative.

Mr. WATSON. I raised that question earlier.

Do you think it would be equitable to hold the master if you exonerate the servant? How can you rationally hold the employer if you don't hold the employee?

Mr. MOLONEY. I don't think you can. The justification, if there be any, for the proposed amendment for relieving the employee and his representative from any actions or penalties under the bill was described somewhat as double jeopardy.

Suppose his superior told him to do something that would violate the Secretary's regulations, then he would either have to violate the Secretary's regulations or violate his superior's orders.

In my opinion, I think that is a rather farfetched illustration. I don't think it is a justifiable criticism of railroad supervisory employees. I think if the regulation existed their direction would in every instance be to comply with that regulation.

If he didn't comply with that, then I think he should be subject to the penalty.

Mr. WATSON. I want to join with Mr. Keith in commending you and urging you to continue your meetings to try to reduce further the number of injuries and fatalities.

I agree wholeheartedly that the answer to this problem is through a cooperative effort on the part of the brotherhood and management. We have Government involved enough as it is right now.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank you, Mr. Goodfellow. I will say to Mr. Goodfellow that I think perhaps they are starting a new era in the relationship of having these meetings with labor and I hope that they can be continued and worked at energetically to resolve all these issues.

I want to compliment you on starting this and thank you for coming. We have one other witness before the committee, Mr. P. H. Croft, president of the American Short Line Railroad Association. Mr. Croft, will you come forward.

STATEMENT OF P. H. CROFT, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN SHORT LINE RAILROAD ASSOCIATION

Mr. CROFT. Mr. Staggers and members of this committee, I am P. H. Croft, president of the American Short Line Railroad Association which has its general offices here in Washington.

Our association is a voluntary unincorporated nonprofit organization with a membership of 229 class I and class II line-haul and switching railroad common carriers operating in 44 States.

In view of previous testimony offered to you gentlemen, my statement could only border on reiteration. I therefore shall be most brief. First, I wholeheartedly concur that we must first determine if there is a need existing that is now going unsatisfied, and secondly, if there is a need, can it be met by means other than legislation.

In response to committee questions, Mr. Lang suggested that it is difficult to know what kind of rules the Federal Railroad Administration would create.

The vagueness of requirements and compliance, coupled with the all inclusiveness of authority granted to the Department of Transportation under the provisions of this bill, strikes fear in my heart. Virtually every railroad activity would become subject to control of the Department of Transportation.

I believe we all agree that any new legislation requires participation from at least two quarters. Participation, of course, is effort and work.

Due to the small size of some railroads, new participation into any activity can be most taxing.

Although this bill is presented in the name of safety, I believe the scope reaches far beyond this realm. Chairman O'Connell's statement to Administrator Lang; that is, "We believe railroad safety should rest upon railroad management and labor," exactly reflects my feelings.

Having completed 25 years in railroad operations this week, and only being away from direct operational supervision a few weeks, I know the uppermost thought in the minds of each supervisor and employee is safety.

Having made this statement, the obvious question is, "How can we improve our record? By constant surveillance, intensified safety programs, safety education, increased use of safety equipment, detecting and eliminating hazards-in brief-just what was recommended in the first annual report of the National Transportation Safety Board, viz.