Copyright

(c) 2010-2024 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query distracted driving. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query distracted driving. Sort by date Show all posts

Friday, December 12, 2014

The long history of GM’s ignition switch cover up

Today's post is shared from motleyrice.com/
GM’s ignition switch defect has now been linked to 38 deaths to date. The ignition switch problem was so obvious that customers, journalists and even GM employees were reporting the problem a decade before GM finally admitted the issue and recalled the cars.
Way back in 2005, one frightened customer wrote to both GM and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), stating that “This is a safety/recall issue if ever there was one . . . The problem is the ignition turn switch is poorly installed. Even with the slightest touch, the car will shut off while in motion. I don’t have to list for you the safety problems that may happen, besides an accident or death, a car turning off while doing a high speed must cause engine and other problems in the long haul . . . I firmly believe that this ignition switch needs to be recalled, reexamined and corrected.” Yet, GM did nothing.
That same year, New York Times journalist Jeff Sabatini commented on an odd issue with his Chevrolet Cobalt. His wife was driving on the freeway when she accidentally bumped her knee on the steering column and the car “just went dead.” On looking into the issue, he found another writer with the same problem. Journalist Gary Heller of Pennsylvania’s The Daily Item had also experienced “unplanned engine shutdowns [that] happened four times during a hard-driving test week” in his Cobalt. The...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Lloyds Report Targets Potential Cell Phone Liability

Yet another reason why employers should be concerned with the risks of distracted driving has been reported by Lloyds of London. A recent report considers the electromagnetic fields (EMF) from mobile phones a potential risk to health.

The report reviews the medical causation issues involving a myriad of conditions ranging from brain cancer (acoustic neuromas and gliomas) to central nervous system effects, as well as reproduction and biological development consequences of EMF exposure over the long term. In reviewing historical litigation trends, the Lloyds report compares the legal consequences of asbestos exposure and the development of mesothelioma and analyzes the complicity and enormous liability that resulted from corporate concealment and conspiracy.

With over 4.3 billion mobile phones in use worldwide as of June 2009, this report increases the concern of employers who are already experiencing increased liability because of the use of cell phones while driving. A major initiative is underway by US Department of Transportation to curtail the use of cell phone by employee while driving because of the increase risk of motor vehicle accidents.

As workers’ compensation insurance carriers have already been challenged by significant losses as a result of occupational exposure to asbestos, the Lloyds report may encourage employers to restrict the use of a cell phone, except when used in a safe and protected manner. 


Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Truck Crash That Kills 11 Results in Call For A National Cellphone Ban

Citing distraction from the use of a mobile phone by the driver of an 18-wheel semi truck as the probable cause of a crash that killed 11 people, the National Transportation Safety Board recommended banning the use of mobile phones by commercial drivers except in emergencies. Accidents arising from the use of cell phone are resulting major liability & workers' compensation problems for employers.

"Distracted driving is becoming increasingly prevalent, exacerbating the danger we encounter daily on our roadways," said NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman. "It can be especially lethal when the distracted driver is at the wheel of a vehicle that weighs 40 tons and travels at highway speeds."

On March 26, 2010, at about 5:14 a.m. CDT, near Munfordville, Kentucky, a truck-tractor semitrailer combination unit driven by a 45-year-old male departed the left lane of southbound Interstate 65, crossed a 60-foot-wide median, struck and overrode a cable barrier system, entered the northbound travel lanes, and struck a 15-passenger van, driven by a 41-year-old male and occupied by 11 passengers (eight adults, two small children, and an infant). The truck driver and 10 of the 12 occupants of the van were killed.

Investigators determined that the driver used his mobile phone for calls and text messages a total of 69 times while driving in the 24-hour period prior to the accident. The driver made four calls in the minutes leading up to the crash, making the last call at 5:14 a.m. CDT, coinciding with the time that the truck departed the highway.

The Safety Board also determined that the median barrier system, which had recently been installed following another cross-median fatal accident on the same section of I-65, contributed to the severity of the accident because it was not designed to redirect or contain a vehicle of the accident truck's size. Because median crossover accidents involving large vehicles are so deadly, the NTSB made recommendations regarding the use of appropriately designed median barriers on roadways with high volumes of commercial vehicles.

At the meeting today, the NTSB issued 15 new safety recommendations to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA), all 50 states, and the District of Columbia. The Safety Board also reiterated two previously issued recommendations to the FMCSA.

A synopsis of the NTSB report, including the probable cause, findings, and a complete list of all the safety recommendations, is available on the NTSB's website. The NTSB's full report will be available on the website in several weeks.

RELATED MATERIAL

Board meeting announcement (9/8/11)

Investigative update (5/14/10)

Launch of investigative team to accident site (3/26/10)

Monday, November 5, 2012

OSHA urges hurricane recovery workers to protect themselves against hazards


The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration is urging workers and members of the public engaged in Hurricane Sandy cleanup and recovery efforts in New York, New Jersey and the New England states to be aware of the hazards they might encounter and the steps they should take to protect themselves.
"Storm recovery workers are working around the clock to clean up areas impacted by the storm," said Robert Kulick, OSHA's New York regional administrator. "We want to make sure that workers are aware of the hazards involved in cleanup work and take the necessary precautions to prevent serious injuries."
OSHA field staff members are providing safety assistance, technical support, and information and training to those involved in the recovery efforts. For more information about unsafe work situations, workers and the general public can contact OSHA's toll-free hotline at 800-321-OSHA (6742).
For more information about protecting workers during Hurricane Sandy recovery, visithttp://www.osha.gov/sandy/index.html. This comprehensive website offers fact sheets, concise "quick cards," frequently asked questions, safety and health guides, and additional information in English and Spanish.
Cleanup work can involve restoring electricity, communications, and water and sewer services; demolition activities; removal of floodwater from structures; entry into flooded areas; cleaning up debris; tree trimming; structural, roadway, bridge, dam and levee repair; use of cranes, aerial lifts and other heavy equipment; hazardous waste operations; and emergency response activities.
Inherent hazards may include downed electrical wires, carbon monoxide and electrical hazards from portable generators, fall and "struck-by" hazards from tree trimming or working at heights, being caught in unprotected excavations or confined spaces, burns, lacerations, musculoskeletal injuries, being struck by traffic or heavy equipment, and drowning from being caught in moving water or while removing water from flooded structures.
Protective measures include evaluating the work area for all hazards; assuming all power lines are live; using the right personal protective equipment (hard hats, shoes, reflective vests, safety glasses); conducting exposure monitoring where there are chemical hazards; following safe tree cutting procedures to prevent trees from falling on workers; and using fall protection and proper ladder safety when working at heights.
For additional information on grants, cleanup efforts and recovery resources, visit the Labor Department's Hurricane Recovery Assistance Web page, which is being continuously updated at http://www.dol.gov/opa/hurricane-recovery.htm. Also, a checklist of activities to be undertaken before, during and after a hurricane is available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency at http://www.ready.gov/hurricanes.

Read More About Safety

Jan 17, 2012
The US Occupational Safety and Health Administration has published a white paper urging that States implement injury and illness prevention programs. Citing statistics of the consequences of industrial accidents and injuries ...
Jun 21, 2011
Sun Exposure, Prevention and Workers Compensation. The first day of summer brings attention to working outside, sun exposure and the risk of skin cancer. Workers Compensation coverage offers a unique opportunity to ...
Mar 29, 2011
Symposium on Prevention of Occupationally-Related Distracted Driving. Distracted driving (including texting while driving and cell phone use) is a major cause of motor vehicle crashes. Many workers may be distracted while...
Jun 30, 2011
The initiative, with funds from the Affordable Care Act's Prevention and Public Health Fund, is aimed at improving workplace environments so that they support healthy lifestyles and reduce risk factors for chronic diseases like...

Monday, April 29, 2013

Intoxication, Work, And Workers' Compensation Don’t Mix

Today's post comes from guest author Paul J. McAndrew, Jr. from Paul McAndrew Law Firm of Iowa.
Most of us know that, for both professional reasons and in the interest of safety, remaining sober while on the job is essential. However, it is important to also recognize that workers who are intoxicated at the time that they sustain a work injury stand a far lower chance of ever collecting workers’ compensation.
If the blood test shows the presence of alcohol or drugs, odds that the employee will be able to collect workers’ compensation are much lower.
This is because of the intoxication defense: if an employer can prove that intoxication was the cause of the workers’ injury, then they employer is not required to provide workers’ comp for that injury. Now, there are some notable

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

IARC To Issue Report on Cell Phones

The World Health Organization (WHO) is expected to release a decision by June 1st as to whether the radiation emitted from cellphones causes cancer. Scientists at the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer will take part in an eight-day meeting in Lyons, France starting May 24, 2011. 

The use of cell phones in the course of employment is a major concern as it results in distracted driving accidents. The new report will determine if employer mandated cell phone use can be causally connected to occupational cancer claims.


For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman  1.973.696.7900  jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Textual Despondency

No, this is NOT an April fool's joke. Texting is a major problem and a major distraction from the focus of work. Even if occurring within the scope of employment, it is still a major factor in concentration and is therefore a safety concern. Today's guest post is from David Paolo.

This condition reportedly has been a "world wide health concern" since around 2011 when conditions associated with excessive cell phone usage for texting and other mobile communications activities other than a phone call were starting to be identified.

A couple of weeks ago I was in San Francisco for the California Workers' Compensation Institute's annual meeting.

San Francisco must be the leading city where this "condition" could be studied. I was astounded at how many people walk around that town with their necks bent towards the ground, small devices in hand, paying zero attention to where they are, where they're going, or anyone or anything around them.

The number of people with zero spatial orientation or situational awareness as a result of profound hand-held device distraction was amazing to me.

Even in the elevator of the hotel where normally cellular signals aren't strong, if existent at all, a couple of gentlemen occupied the car as I got on heading to upper floors; they both were completely immersed in their devices. They did not look up, acknowledge my presence in any way or even acknowledge each other.

We got to the seventh floor and, without even a short little glance above the screen in his hand held one fellow starts toward the open doors and says, I presume to the other guy in the elevator, "see you at dinner."

The other guy, likewise, did not take his stare off the screen of his hand held device, thumb busy scrambling...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Related articles:
Nov 03, 2013
Lost in the clamor for stricter distracted-driving laws, a study from April 2013 found discouraging patterns in the relationship between texting bans and traffic fatalities. As one might expect, single occupant vehicle crashes dip ...
Oct 23, 2013
... drive on the roads. While the Federal government has strictly enforced the no texting while driving rule, the states maintain a patchwork of confusing regulations and statutory prohibitions. Today's post is shared from nj.com.
Oct 01, 2013
Andrew M. Cuomo revealed a plan to put "texting zones" on the New York State Thruway and state highways, where drivers can pull over and respond to text messages. This is, in part, a response to the fact that New York has ...
Aug 30, 2013
who is texting from a location remote from the driver of a motor vehicle can be liable to persons injured because the driver was distracted by the text. We hold that the sender of a text message can potentially be liable if an ...

Sunday, November 3, 2013

Why Texting-While-Driving Bans Don't Work

Today's post was shared by Mother Jones and comes from www.motherjones.com


Lost in the clamor for stricter distracted-driving laws, a study from April 2013 found discouraging patterns in the relationship between texting bans and traffic fatalities.
As one might expect, single occupant vehicle crashes dip noticeably when a state legislature enacts a texting and driving ban. But the change is always short-lived, according to this study, which examined data from every state except Alaska from 2007 through 2010. Within months, the accident rate typically returned to pre-ban levels.
The researchers, Rahi Abouk and Scott Adams of University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, attribute this pattern to the "announcement effect," when drivers adjust their behavior to compensate for a perceived law enforcement threat—only to return to old habits when enforcement appears ineffectual. In other words, drivers might dial back their texting when they hear about a ban, but after they succumb to the urge once or twice and get away with it, they determine it's okay and keep doing it.
"It's different than drunk driving," Adams said. Identifying intoxicated drivers is relatively easy, "you can give somebody a breathalyzer, you can have checkpoints." But with texting, "it's really hard [for policemen] to know" if someone's been texting.
No one denies the dangers of texting while driving. In fact, 95 percent of AAA survey (PDF) respondents said texting behind the wheel was a "very" serious threat to their personal safety. But 35 percent of the same...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Friday, July 31, 2009

Working While Texting: The New Workers Compensation Defense

New technology encroaching upon the workplace has been both a help and a hindrance. Recent studies add to the growing volumes of data reporting that the use of cell phones while driving provides a significant distraction and increases the risk of accidents at alarming rates.

A recent study by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI) has adds to mounds of data that the use of cell phone technology is a driving distraction. The study combined more than 6,000,000 miles of driving and causally relates the use of cell phone technology and the increased risk of motor vehicle accidents. The study concluded that merely dialing a cell phone while driving produces an accident risk of 2.8 times as high as a non-distracted driver. The use of a heavy vehicle or truck, normally used in commercial situations, increased rate of a risk of crash of 23.2 times as high as the non-distracted driver. The report concludes that “…..texting should be banned in moving vehicles for all drivers. “

“Given recent catastrophic crash events and disturbing trends, there is an alarming amount of misinformation and confusion regarding cell phone and texting use while behind the wheel of a vehicle. The findings from our research at VTTI can help begin to clear up these misconceptions as it is based on real world driving data. We conduct transportation safety research in an effort to equip the public with information that can save lives,” says Dr. Tom Dingus, director of the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute.

Workers’ compensation is based upon a no-fault system, and few defenses exist that bar recovery. Defenses such as intoxication or working under the influence of controlled dangerous substances may limit or bar recovery in many jurisdictions. Generally, if an accident or injury was the sole or proximate cause of the prohibitive activity, recovery will be denied.

Public outrage as to the findings of the VTTI study has quickly generated into proposed Federal legislation, by Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D. N.Y.) and three other Democrats, to ban the use of cell phones for texting while driving. Only 14 States have enacted progressive legislation to outright ban texting while driving.

Accidents and injuries at work have a devastating economic impact on a State’s economy. The study will assist State legislatures and courts to recognize that manual manipulation of phones, such as dialing and texting of the cell phone, results in a substantial increase in the risk of being involved in a safety critical event. Workers’ compensation benefits may be prohibited by statute for working while texting (WWT) . In the alternative Courts, may merely consider such events as a risk not associated with the employment, ie. a communication not related to employment or an employer prohibited activity, or, in some instances, a mere deviation from employment. Audits of wireless communication records will assist in providing a data trail.

The Center for Truck and Bus Safety at VTTI, by publishing the study, has made a significant contribution to workplace safety. The message has now been sent for action to be taken to eliminate this safety risk at work.

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Federal Summit Planned for Distracted Driving

The problem of the increase in accidents on the road caused by distracted drivers will now be the subject of a Federal summit. U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has announced a summit in Sate September.

“If it were up to me, I would ban drivers from texting, but unfortunately, laws aren’t always enough,” said Sec. LaHood. “We’ve learned from past safety awareness campaigns that it takes a coordinated strategy combining education and enforcement to get results. That’s why this meeting with experienced officials, experts and law enforcement will be such a crucial first step in our efforts to put an end to distracted driving.”

Yet to be determined is how this new concern will impact State Workers' Compensation programs.

Monday, July 22, 2013

Transportation Accidents: Data Recorders Will Soon Define Compensability of Accidents

Workers' compensation claims are often defined by whether the accident arose out of and in the course of the employment. New technology in the coming years maybe become critical evidence in determining the casual relationship of transportation accidents as well as whether the employee deviated from the employment at the time of the event.
Event Data Recorder


"....at the center of a growing debate over a little-known but increasingly important piece of equipment buried deep inside a car: the event data recorder, more commonly known as the black box.

"About 96 percent of all new vehicles sold in the United States have the boxes, and in September 2014, if the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has its way, all will have them.

"The boxes have long been used by car companies to assess the performance of their vehicles. But data stored in the devices is increasingly being used to identify safety problems in cars and as evidence in traffic accidents and criminal cases. And the trove of data inside the boxes has raised privacy concerns, including questions about who owns the information, and what it can be used for, even as critics have raised questions about its reliability.


Click here to read the entire article, "A Black Box for Car Crashes" NY Times

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Employee Penalized For Not Following Safety Rules

An employee's workers' compensation award maybe be reduced for failing to follow an employer's safety rules. A Missouri Court ruled that reducing an injured employee's award by 25% to 50% for failing to follow an employer's safety rules was not unconstitutional.

This ruling may have widespread application in many situations including distracted driving claims, where an employee sustains an accident while using a cell phone in violation of an employer's cell phone policy. The employer woud still remain responsible for the reduced award and, of course, subject to a 3rd part law suit by a potential 3rd party.

The reduction rule actually places fault back into the workers' compensation system which both violates the intent of the Act . Such a policy does not compensate for the reduced values (awards) anticipated and prescribed under the workers' compensation act. While the the logic seems to rational, the application further emasculates the intent of workers' compensation. It would be far more logical to put the cart before the horse, and work to prevent the unsafe work condition in the first place. Shifting responsibility to the injured worker is not consistent with the act's intent.

Thompson v. ICI American Holding, 2011 WL 3444008 (Mo.App. W.D.) Decided, August 9, 2011
For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman  1.973.696.7900  jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.


Saturday, July 30, 2011

Cell Phones and Cancer: The Static in the Debate

A recently published European study boldly and with much confusion declares that children are not at an increased risk of cancer as a result of cell phone use. Knowledgeable commentators has questioned the reliability of the data and analysis resulting in questioning the veracity of the European study altogether.

Microwave News reported:
'The first study to look at brain tumors among children and teenagers who have used cell phones came out today and it shows no increased risk. Well, actually, the study, known as CEFALO, does indicate a higher risk —the problem is that it found a higher risk for all the kids who used a phone more than once a week for six months, regardless of how much time they spent on the phone. Because the risk does not go up with more use, the CEFALO team argues that the results argue against a true association.

Professor Franklin E. Mier, PhD, CID, Environmental and Occupational Health SciencesCUNY School of Public Health at Hunter College, commented:
"A study may provide "evidence for," or more rarely, evidence against an increased risk associated with an exposure. The exposure should be further characterized by level and duration. The evidence might further be characterized as "clear," "some" or "equivocal." In studies of people, either single studies or a collections of studies, "chance, bias, and confounding" must be evaluated, which impacts the strength of the evidence derived from the study. Studies failing to find an association should be characterized as "null" rather than "negative."

"Each newly published study should be characterized in the context of previous studies, evaluated as a group. IARC characterized the body of evidence previous to the study reported here as "limited." Those who wish to make their own evaluation should read the IARC monograph in detail. Personally, I don't think the body of evidence will ever advance beyond "limited" evidence. Also, resources and media attention will continue to be devoted to restudying this exposure (as opposed to other exposures of concern) because rich people use cell phones.

Dramatically conflicting studies are now surfacing. The signal is not yet clear and the static will have to resolve before the causal connection between cell phone use and cancer can be ruled out.


Related articles

Thursday, February 16, 2012

Distracted Driving: Federal Guidelines Proposed For Automakers

After years of accidents in the workplace caused by the use of mobile devices in vehicles, the Federal Government today proposed universal universal guidelines to encourage automobile manufacturers to electronically disable these devices when a vehicle is in operation.  The enforcement of this safety-first proposal may establish a legal standard universally to bar the use of such devices in vehicles and encourage employees to have a safer working environment.

See: U.S. Department of Transportation Proposes ‘Distraction’ Guidelines for Automakers
"Issued by the Department’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the guidelines would establish specific recommended criteria for electronic devices installed in vehicles at the time they are manufactured that require visual or manual operation by drivers. The announcement of the guidelines comes just days after President Obama’s FY 2013 budget request, which includes $330 million over six years for distracted driving programs that increase awareness of the issue and encourage stakeholders to take action. "

Thursday, July 7, 2011

Distracted Driving Increases Workers' Compensation Risks

In a recent video interview, Jon Gelman, spoke about the serious workers' compensation and liability risks that employers face flowing from distracted driving.

For the complete interview click here.

Monday, April 14, 2014

Add Texting to the List of Things That Are Killing Us Faster


Today, in news that will make you feel bad about your existence: Texting and tinkering with mobile devices for extended periods of time could make you die sooner, the doctors of the world say.
As The Telegraph reports, the hunchback pose that people adopt while staring down at their devices is known to increase the risk of an early death in the elderly. Chiropractors are concerned that younger people—who spend between one and two hours on their phones a day—could be shaving years off their lives.
The United Chiropractic Association (and probably your mom) say that Gollum-like posture can be just as threatening a health risk as obesity, citing studies that bad posture in older people is linked with a disease called hyperkyphosis. Colloquially known as “dowager’s hump,” this condition is often associated with heart problems. Apparently older folk with even the slightest hump are 1.4 times more likely to die than those without.
In other words, we’ve all been killing ourselves slowly while we sit, smoke, and apply sunscreen. Now texting is helping speed up the process. 
“This isn’t alarmist or scaremongering; it’s what more and more research is telling us,” UCA chiropractor Edwina Waddell told The Telegraph. “And the good news is that it doesn’t have to happen because it’s something we all have a degree of control over.”
Control? Sounds like someone’s never...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]


Related articles:
Nov 03, 2013
Lost in the clamor for stricter distracted-driving laws, a study from April 2013 found discouraging patterns in the relationship between texting bans and traffic fatalities. As one might expect, single occupant vehicle crashes dip ...
Oct 01, 2013
Andrew M. Cuomo revealed a plan to put "texting zones" on the New York State Thruway and state highways, where drivers can pull over and respond to text messages. This is, in part, a response to the fact that New York has ...
Oct 23, 2013
... drive on the roads. While the Federal government has strictly enforced the no texting while driving rule, the states maintain a patchwork of confusing regulations and statutory prohibitions. Today's post is shared from nj.com.

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Put It Down - Friday April 30th

Distracted driving is a major cause of work related motor vehicle accidents. Encouraging employers and employees to go phone free in their vehicles while working is a goal of the US Department of Transportation. 


The US Department of Transportation in conjunction with a campaign by Oprah Winfrey has declared Friday, April 30th a phone free day in motor vehicles.


To read more on distracted driving activity and workers’ compensation, click here.

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Federal Cell Phone Rules Compliance Guide Published

Distracted Driving remains a serious problem in the workplace and now the Federal government is taking enforcement actions to a new level. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) recently announced Rules that it is prohibiting the use of hand-held cell phones by interstate truck and bus drivers.

As the Rules take effect is is anticipated that many states will adapt these changes.  For those who use prohibited devices in the course of their employment and are involved in accidents may ultimately be denied workers' compensation benefits and employer liability will result. ZoomSafer has now published a compliance guide.

See:  FMCSA Cell Phone Rules: A Compliance Guide for Truck and Bus Fleets

Thursday, April 10, 2014

Elite Drivers Provide Tips for Work Zone Awareness Week

Today's post was shared by Trucker Lawyers and comes from www.heraldonline.com

— /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Today, American Trucking Associations is urging motorists to slow down and pay attention while driving through work zone areas. With National Work Zone Awareness Week 2014 marking the 15th anniversary of this life-saving safety campaign, elite drivers with millions of accident-free miles are educating the public on how to stay safe. 

National Work Zone Awareness Week 2014 runs from April 7-11.

America's Road Team Captains, professional truck drivers selected for their impressive driving records and commitment to safety, are sharing their wealth of experience from the road. With four of every five victims in a work zone crash being motorists, these tips can help save lives on our nation's highways.

Work Zone Driving Safety Tips for Motorists:

  • Expect the Unexpected – Speed limits may be reduced, traffic lanes may be changed, and people may be working on or near the road.
  • Speeding is one of the major causes of work zone crashes.
  • Don't Tailgate – Keep a safe following distance between you and the car ahead.
  • Keep a Safe Distance from Construction Workers – and equipment.
  • Pay Attention to Posted Signs – Warning signs are there to help guide you, use them.
  • Stay Alert and Avoid Distracted Driving – Work zones present extra challenges and obstacles. Motorists need to pay attention to the road and their surroundings.
  • – Schedule your trip with plenty of extra time. Expect delays and leave early so you...

[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Friday, November 18, 2011

WorldDay of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims — November 20, 2011

Road traffic crashes kill nearly 1.3 million persons every year and injure or disable as many as 50 million more (1). Road trauma is the leading cause of death among persons aged 10--24 years worldwide and the leading cause of death to those aged 5--34 years in the United States. CDC has declared road traffic injuries a "winnable battle" and supports efforts at the United Nations (UN) and World Health Organization (WHO) to celebrate 2011--2020 as the Decade of Action for Road Safety (2). Distracted driving is a major cause of accidents.
In October 2005, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution* calling for governments to mark the third Sunday in November each year as World Day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims. The day was created as a means to give recognition to persons injured or killed in road traffic crashes and the plight of relatives and others who must cope with the emotional and practical consequences of these events.
WHO and the UN Road Safety Collaboration encourage governments and nongovernmental organizations worldwide to commemorate this day as a means of drawing the public's attention to road traffic crashes, their consequences and costs, and prevention measures. Additional information about the remembrance day is available at http://www.worlddayofremembrance.orgExternal Web Site Icon. Additional information about motor vehicle injuries and prevention is available at http://www.cdc.gov/winnablebattles/motorvehicleinjury.

References

  1. World Health Organization. Global status report on road safety: time for action. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2009.
  2. CDC. Launch of Decade of Action for Global Road Safety---May 11, 2011. MMWR 2011;60:554.

* Improving global road safety, Resolution 60/5, United Nations General Assembly, 60th Sess. (2005). Available at http://www.un.org/en/roadsafety/background.shtmlExternal Web Site Icon.