Monorail Crash - OSHA Findings

fillerup

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
From Jason Garcia at the O'Sentinel


Hectic moments preceded Disney World fatal monorail crash


At about 2 a.m. July 5, as the last of Walt Disney World’s theme parks was closing after one of the busiest days of the year, there was still much to do inside the resort’s monorail-maintenance shop. An electrician there was juggling multiple tasks as he operated the track switches linking the monorail system’s Magic Kingdom and Epcot loops. Three of Disney’s 12 trains were waiting to transfer between tracks, and a fourth was approaching the bay where it was to be parked for the night.

So when the electrician received the radio call instructing him to activate the switch that would allow one of the trains to transfer off the Epcot loop, he logged in to do so. But then, apparently distracted by a call about a door alert from the train approaching the maintenance bay, he did not activate the Epcot switch.

The electrician radioed that he had, though. As a result, the waiting train, driving in reverse to traverse the switch, wound up returning down the Epcot line and crashing into another train, killing that train’s pilot, 21-year-old Austin Wuennenberg of Kissimmee.

Investigators with the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration determined, according to an internal memo summarizing the accident, that the unidentified electrician was “over tasked” that night, though it is unclear whether the agency thought Disney had assigned him too many responsibilities or whether the electrician himself tried to do too much at once.

The internal report is among hundreds of pages of documents compiled by OSHA during a six-month investigation into the accident and reviewed by the Orlando Sentinel after a Freedom of Information Act request. The records provide new details and deeper context to the formal citation OSHA issued in December, when it charged the resort with four workplace-safety violations and proposed a fine totaling $44,000.

An OSHA spokesman characterized the memo as “a draft version” of the final citation. He would not elaborate on the comments within it. “The citations are what OSHA decided to actually cite the company with. … Anything before that is preliminary,” spokesman Mike Wald said.

Among other details from the OSHA’s documents:

– Disney did not provide the electrician with written procedures for operating the computers that controlled the track switches. The electrician was given only oral instructions on the switching procedures sometime in September or October 2008. Disney has since provided written training materials to employees.

– The electrician operating the track switches that night was not the regular person in the job. He was substituting for another employee who has handled switching operations for 21 years — but who was on vacation.

– OSHA investigators considered the guest-service manager who was coordinating the monorail system via radio from an off-property restaurant “negligent” because he was not at a control console where he could have seen that the maintenance worker had not realigned the track. The manager, who was on a dinner break, had allowed the primary coordinator to go home sick and was temporarily handling coordination duties until a replacement worker could reach the central console. The ill employee clocked out at 1:47 a.m. — about 13 minutes before the collision — and his replacement was en route to the central tower at the time of the crash.

– The driver of the train that backed into Wuennenberg’s train had “limited visibility” at the time of the crash. The driver told investigators he could not see with his side-view mirrors because humidity and fog on the windshield “made it nearly impossible to see clearly.” Data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration showed that, at the time of the accident, the temperature was about 76 degrees, with 90 percent humidity.

– Disney’s own investigation of the accident appears to have placed the blame primarily on the electrician in the maintenance shop. Though OSHA did not provide Disney’s internal report as part of its documents, citing a federal public-records exemption governing trade secrets, a letter to OSHA from one of Disney’s lawyers said the company’s internal probe “demonstrates that the accident was caused when the maintenance panel operator improperly gave the command that the switch had been completed by him when, in fact, it had not been completed.”

A spokeswoman for Disney would not comment on issues raised in OSHA’s documents, saying the resort has agreed not to discuss the accident until the National Transportation Safety Board completes its own investigation. A representative for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the union that represents the electrician, also would not comment.

A representative for the Transportation Communications International Union, which represents monorail drivers, said the investigation demonstrated that neither Wuennenberg nor the other monorail driver was to blame for the accident.

“It was proven by multiple agencies that none of the Service Trades Council employees were found to be at fault, including either monorail pilot,” said Randall Sluder, a field representative for the union.
OSHA’s investigation ultimately led to a formal citation, issued Dec. 23, charging Disney with one “serious” workplace-safety violation that contributed to the collision.

In that citation, OSHA broadly criticized Disney for failing to provide a safe workplace, noting several policy lapses.

Among them: failing to follow a recommendation from monorail-manufacturer Bombardier that a spotter be used to watch the back end of any train driving in reverse, and failing to require the monorail’s central coordinator to be stationed at the main console whenever a track switch was occurring.

OSHA also cited Disney for three other, unrelated safety violations that it discovered during the monorail probe.

Disney has made a series of policy changes in the accident’s aftermath. The day after the crash, for instance, the resort began requiring that coordinators remain at the central console during track switches and that monorail drivers switch ends and drive from twin controls in the rear cabin of their trains when reversing direction through the Epcot switch.

In September, Disney said it had provided monorail-maintenance-shop workers with written instructions for the panel that controls the track switches. And in December, three days before OSHA publicly issued its citation, Disney began requiring spotters to watch the rear end of any train backing up.

Shortly after the accident, Disney placed the three employees directly involved with the sequence of events leading up to the accident — the electrician in the maintenance shop, the manager who had been filling in as central coordinator, and the driver of the second train in the collision — on administrative leave. The electrician and the manager recently returned to work in different roles with the company, according to a person familiar with their employment status; the driver has been offered a new job within Disney but has so far opted not to return.
Disney spokeswoman Zoraya Suarez would say only that two of the employees are back at work, while the other is “not yet” back.

OSHA ultimately fined Disney $35,200, a 20 percent reduction from the $44,000 in penalties it initially proposed. Disney paid with a check dated Jan. 22.

Jason Garcia can be reached at jrgarcia@orlandosentinel.com or 407-420-5414.

http://thedailydisney.com/blog/2010/02/disney-monorail-crash/
 

prberk

Well-Known Member
Seems to be a well-researched report.

Still very sad. I can't imagine, either, what those folks who might have been at fault or negligent in some way might feel.

Sad.
 

TOTGuy

Member
This is a very well written article. I feel bad for the manager who has been branded "negligent" by just trying to help out a sick co-worker. Again this was just a tragic accident, and I am glad this report shined some light on what was going on in the shop at the time. Hopefully something like this will NEVER happen again.
RIP Austin.
 

JWG

Well-Known Member
This is a very well written article. I feel bad for the manager who has been branded "negligent" by just trying to help out a sick co-worker. Again this was just a tragic accident, and I am glad this report shined some light on what was going on in the shop at the time. Hopefully something like this will NEVER happen again.
RIP Austin.

Considering the timing, 13 minutes from time the sick individual left to accident, the "negligent" manager was probably already on his legitimate break and offsite. And, probably followed standard "unwritten" SOP on the requested track switch.
 

Phonedave

Well-Known Member
This is a very well written article. I feel bad for the manager who has been branded "negligent" by just trying to help out a sick co-worker. Again this was just a tragic accident, and I am glad this report shined some light on what was going on in the shop at the time. Hopefully something like this will NEVER happen again.
RIP Austin.


I am willing to bet that if that manager was on his break, and he told the employee who was sick to "gut it out for half an hour" so he could get back, then there would be complaints about how insensitive management is.

I also noticed that little quote by the union official about how none of their members were to blame. As if that is directly because of the fine training program that the union has put in place.

-dave
 

CRO-Magnum

Active Member
Still tragic...

...but at least Disney appears to have taken all the proper steps to prevent this from happening again. Somewhat a perfect storm of situations, not a single incident, created the environment necessary for this tragedy to occur.

Now we move on...
 

CDavid

Well-Known Member
The pieced together monorail was put back in service in December, I believe.

You're thinking of monorail Teal, right (mostly the undamaged sections of monorail pink). The center cars from monorail purple and the damaged Pink and Purple cabs have yet to return to service.
 

Tom

Beta Return
Great article. Should help to answer a lot of the questions being exhausted on these boards.

I feel bad for the manager who has been branded "negligent" by just trying to help out a sick co-worker. Again this was just a tragic accident, and I am glad this report shined some light on what was going on in the shop at the time. Hopefully something like this will NEVER happen again.RIP Austin.

Agreed. "Negligent" is a very harsh word, especially in its purely legal sense. None of us will ever know the TRUE story of this entire situation, but I personally feel that it's irresponsible of Disney or OSHA to cite this one person as being "negligent" when he should have never been put in this position in the first place. Had Disney properly trained everyone, or had proper documentation and protocols in place, this manager's presence would have made absolutely no difference. This "electrician" carries the most blame of anyone - since he literally made the call that killed someone. Whether he was overworked or not, he made a grave and unacceptable mistake.

I am willing to bet that if that manager was on his break, and he told the employee who was sick to "gut it out for half an hour" so he could get back, then there would be complaints about how insensitive management is.

I also noticed that little quote by the union official about how none of their members were to blame. As if that is directly because of the fine training program that the union has put in place.

-dave

Oh geez - you are SO RIGHT on both accounts.
 

IlikeDW

Active Member
Great article. Should help to answer a lot of the questions being exhausted on these boards.



Agreed. "Negligent" is a very harsh word, especially in its purely legal sense. None of us will ever know the TRUE story of this entire situation, but I personally feel that it's irresponsible of Disney or OSHA to cite this one person as being "negligent" when he should have never been put in this position in the first place. Had Disney properly trained everyone, or had proper documentation and protocols in place, this manager's presence would have made absolutely no difference. This "electrician" carries the most blame of anyone - since he literally made the call that killed someone. Whether he was overworked or not, he made a grave and unacceptable mistake.



Oh geez - you are SO RIGHT on both accounts.

Definition of Negligent from websters : failing to exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent person in like circumstances

I don't want to pick on the manager because he is far from the cause of the accident but he was part of the chain of events that could have prevented it. I am sure he has asked himself a thousand times why did I not tell the sick person to stay at the station until the replacement arrived(15-30 min) of course using the definition anyone at the station who saw the train approach and did not hit the kill switch, the electrician who missed the switch, the managers manger who did not ensure that policy was in place to prevent station from being unmanned could all be deemed negligent, so the word may not be too harsh but the singling out may be?
 

Tom

Beta Return
Definition of Negligent from websters : failing to exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent person in like circumstances

I don't want to pick on the manager because he is far from the cause of the accident but he was part of the chain of events that could have prevented it. I am sure he has asked himself a thousand times why did I not tell the sick person to stay at the station until the replacement arrived(15-30 min) of course using the definition anyone at the station who saw the train approach and did not hit the kill switch, the electrician who missed the switch, the managers manger who did not ensure that policy was in place to prevent station from being unmanned could all be deemed negligent, so the word may not be too harsh but the singling out may be?

Good points. Many to blame - nobody to assign all blame to.
 

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Definition of Negligent from websters : failing to exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent person in like circumstances

I don't want to pick on the manager because he is far from the cause of the accident but he was part of the chain of events that could have prevented it. I am sure he has asked himself a thousand times why did I not tell the sick person to stay at the station until the replacement arrived(15-30 min) of course using the definition anyone at the station who saw the train approach and did not hit the kill switch, the electrician who missed the switch, the managers manger who did not ensure that policy was in place to prevent station from being unmanned could all be deemed negligent, so the word may not be too harsh but the singling out may be?

I don't like the way the word is/was tossed around because it seems to deflect blame (or pushes people) into a belief that this was all about INDIVIDUAL neglect and fault (which even if true means nothing because the CMs all were employed by Disney, so it's still on them from a legal standpoint) and not systematic failures in Disney's SOP.

There were so many ways this could and should have been prevented. Right down to the oblivious CM with the kill switch (who BTW was working the very NEXT night at the TTC and looked as out of it as could be).

Ulitmately, safety is a culture. And it was lacking at Disney in transport for years now ... and I am not sure things have gotten better largely.
 

Tom

Beta Return
Ulitmately, safety is a culture. And it was lacking at Disney in transport for years now ... and I am not sure things have gotten better largely.

This is very true. When people get into a groove of working a certain way - especially an unsafe, yet easier way - it's VERY hard to change that. I see this in my industry (construction) quite often.

It literally takes the misfortune of a person being DIRECTLY affected by an accident to even have a prayer of making them change their ways. And even then, it doesn't always make the impression that it should.

Assuming the surviving pilot, manager and electrician really are (or will) still working for Disney, one would hope that they learned a lesson from this. As for anyone in Monorails who wasn't directly involved, it can be presumed that while they MAY pretend to work safer for a while, they'll return to their pre-accident ways.

It literally takes proactive and intense involvement from management - including a severe punishment system - for drastic change in behavior to occur.

It's human nature...
 

GenerationX

Well-Known Member
Disney has made a series of policy changes in the accident’s aftermath. The day after the crash, for instance, the resort began requiring that coordinators remain at the central console during track switches and that monorail drivers switch ends and drive from twin controls in the rear cabin of their trains when reversing direction through the Epcot switch.
That last policy change seems like such a no-brainer. I'm curious as to why it wasn't standard operating procedure from the beginning. Moreso than any other aspect of this that has been discussed, adoption of this one policy would have likely averted the tragedy.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom