U.S. Department of 

Transportation 

Federal Railroad 

Administration

Railroad Dispatching Operations: Putting 

Research into Practice–Workshop Summary 

Office of Research 

and Development 

Washington, DC 20590 

DOT/FRA/ORD-06/23 Final Report 

October 2006 

This document is available to the U.S. 

public through the National Technical 

Information Service, Springfield, VA 

22161 and at www.fra.dot.gov. 
NOTICE 

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the 

Department of Transportation in the interest of information 

exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for 

its contents or use thereof. 

NOTICE 

The United States Government does not endorse products or 

manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein 

solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this 

report. 

 
i

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

 OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE

October 2006 

3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

Final Report, May-Sept. 2004 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Railroad Dispatching Operations: Putting Research into Practice–Workshop Summary 

6. AUTHOR(S)

Judith Gertler and Sarah Acton 

5. FUNDING NUMBERS 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

Foster-Miller, Inc. 

350 Second Avenue 

Waltham, MA 02451-1196 

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

REPORT NUMBER

DFRA.010350.004 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Office of Research and Development 

Washington, DC 20590 

10. SPONSORING/MONITORING 

 AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

DOT/FRA/ORD-06/23 

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

COTR: Michael Coplen 

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, 

Springfield, Virginia 22161. This document is also available at www.fra.dot.gov. 

12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

This report summarizes the material presented at a 1-day workshop, Railroad Dispatching Operations: Putting Research into 

Practice, sponsored by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Office of Research and Development Human Factors Program. 

The purpose of the workshop was to share the most important findings of research on dispatching with railroad dispatching center 

management and labor and to identify problem areas where additional research is needed. A total of 63 people from the railroad

industry, organized labor, government, and the research community participated. Speakers presented the results of FRAsponsored research, industry-sponsored research, and current industry best practices. The luncheon speaker described European 

dispatching operations, and two panel sessions provided an opportunity for representatives from railroad industry and labor to 

share best practices and identify future challenges in dispatching operations. A majority of attendees rated the workshop content 

and organization as very good to excellent. Comments from workshop participants led to the identification of areas where 

additional research should be considered. These areas include retention of dispatchers, critical incident skills training, and the 

impact of positive train control on the dispatcher’s job. Based on the success of this event, FRA should consider a broader 

program of workshops to share the results of human factors research projects. 

15. NUMBER OF PAGES

161 

14. SUBJECT TERMS

Railroad dispatcher, train dispatcher, rail traffic controller, workload, fatigue, stress, taskload, 

personnel selection, traffic planning 16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 

 OF REPORT

 Unclassified

18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

 OF THIS PAGE

 Unclassified

19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 

 OF ABSTRACT

 Unclassified

20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

None 

NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) 

Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18 

298-102 
ii 

METRIC/ENGLISH CONVERSION FACTORS 

ENGLISH TO METRIC METRIC TO ENGLISH

LENGTH (APPROXIMATE) LENGTH (APPROXIMATE) 

1 inch (in) = 2.5 centimeters (cm) 1 millimeter (mm) = 0.04 inch (in) 

1 foot (ft) = 30 centimeters (cm) 1 centimeter (cm) = 0.4 inch (in) 

1 yard (yd) = 0.9 meter (m) 1 meter (m) = 3.3 feet (ft) 

1 mile (mi) = 1.6 kilometers (km) 1 meter (m) = 1.1 yards (yd) 

 1 kilometer (km) = 0.6 mile (mi)

AREA (APPROXIMATE) AREA (APPROXIMATE) 

1 square inch (sq in, in2) = 6.5 square centimeters (cm2) 1 square centimeter (cm2) = 0.16 square inch (sq in, in2) 

1 square foot (sq ft, ft2) = 0.09 square meter (m2) 1 square meter (m2) = 1.2 square yards (sq yd, yd2) 

1 square yard (sq yd, yd2) = 0.8 square meter (m2) 1 square kilometer (km2) = 0.4 square mile (sq mi, mi2) 

1 square mile (sq mi, mi2) = 2.6 square kilometers (km2) 10,000 square meters (m2) = 1 hectare (ha) = 2.5 acres 

1 acre = 0.4 hectare (he) = 4,000 square meters (m2) 

MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE) MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE) 

1 ounce (oz) = 28 grams (gm) 1 gram (gm) = 0.036 ounce (oz) 

1 pound (lb) = 0.45 kilogram (kg) 1 kilogram (kg) = 2.2 pounds (lb) 

1 short ton = 2,000 pounds 

(lb) 

= 0.9 tonne (t) 1 tonne (t) =

=

1,000 kilograms (kg) 

1.1 short tons

VOLUME (APPROXIMATE) VOLUME (APPROXIMATE) 

1 teaspoon (tsp) = 5 milliliters (ml) 1 milliliter (ml) = 0.03 fluid ounce (fl oz) 

1 tablespoon (tbsp) = 15 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (l) = 2.1 pints (pt) 

1 fluid ounce (fl oz) = 30 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (l) = 1.06 quarts (qt) 

1 cup (c) = 0.24 liter (l) 1 liter (l) = 0.26 gallon (gal) 

1 pint (pt) = 0.47 liter (l) 

 1 quart (qt) = 0.96 liter (l) 

1 gallon (gal) = 3.8 liters (l) 

1 cubic foot (cu ft, ft3) = 0.03 cubic meter (m3) 1 cubic meter (m3) = 36 cubic feet (cu ft, ft3) 

1 cubic yard (cu yd, yd3) = 0.76 cubic meter (m3) 1 cubic meter (m3) = 1.3 cubic yards (cu yd, yd3)

TEMPERATURE (EXACT) TEMPERATURE (EXACT) 

[(x-32)(5/9)] °F = y °C [(9/5) y + 32] °C = x °F

QUICK INCH - CENTIMETER LENGTH CONVERSION

0 1 2 34 5

Inches

Centimeters 01 3 2 6 11 4 5 7 13 8 9 10 12

QUICK FAHRENHEIT - CELSIUS TEMPERATURE CONVERSION

 -40° -22° -4° 14° 32° 50° 68° 86° 104° 122° 140° 158° 176° 194° 212°

 

°F

 °C -40° -30° -20° -10° 0° 10° 20° 30° 40° 50° 60° 70° 80° 90° 100°

For more exact and or other conversion factors, see NIST Miscellaneous Publication 286, Units of Weights and 

Measures. Price $2.50 SD Catalog No. C13 10286 Updated 6/17/98
iii 

Contents 

Illustrations ..................................................................................................................................... v 

Tables.............................................................................................................................................. v 

Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................... vii 

Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ 1 

1. Introduction................................................................................................................................. 7 

1.1 Background......................................................................................................................... 7 

1.2 Workshop Goals.................................................................................................................. 8 

1.3 Organization of the Report.................................................................................................. 8 

2. FRA’s Human Factors R&D Program........................................................................................ 9 

2.1 Program Overview.............................................................................................................. 9 

2.2 Mission and Vision ............................................................................................................. 9 

2.3 Key Functions ..................................................................................................................... 9 

2.4 Strategic Goals.................................................................................................................. 10 

2.5 Human Factors Research in a Socio-Technical System ................................................... 11 

3. Presentations ............................................................................................................................. 15 

3.1 Development of a Dispatcher Selection Program (Judith Gertler) ................................... 15 

3.2 Panel Discussion: Development of a Dispatcher Selection Program .............................. 17 

3.3 Dispatcher Workload Stress and Fatigue (Stephen Popkin)............................................. 21 

3.4 Fatigue Management Behaviors: Effects of Feedback from Performance Actigraphs 

(Patrick Sherry).............................................................................................................. 23 

3.5 The 21st Century Short Line Dispatching Center (Thomas Murphy) .............................. 25 

3.6 European Dispatching Operations (Joern Pachl) .............................................................. 26 

3.7 The Job of a Vessel Traffic Services Operator (Ed Wendlandt) ...................................... 28 

3.8 Dispatcher Taskload Assessment Tool (Stephen Reinach) .............................................. 30 

3.9 Understanding How Dispatchers Manage and Control Trains (Emilie Roth) .................. 32 

3.10 Visualizing Railroad Operations: A Tool for Traffic Planners and Dispatchers (Mary 

Lee) ................................................................................................................................ 33 

3.11 Panel Discussion: Future Challenges and Research Needs ............................................. 34 

4. Attendee Feedback.................................................................................................................... 41 

5. Important Issues........................................................................................................................ 45 

6. Recommendations..................................................................................................................... 47 

Appendix A. Workshop Agenda.................................................................................................. 49 

Appendix B. List of Attendees..................................................................................................... 51 

Appendix C. Participant Biographies .......................................................................................... 53 
iv 

Appendix D. Speaker and Panelist Slides.................................................................................... 59 

Appendix E. Bibliography of Dispatcher Research................................................................... 147 

Abbreviations.............................................................................................................................. 149 

Glossary ...................................................................................................................................... 151 
v 

Illustrations 

Figure 1. Structure of Human Factors R&D Program ................................................................. 10 

Figure 2. Human Factors Program in Relation to Elements of a Socio-Technical System......... 12 

Figure 3. Human Factors Research Prioritization and Project Selection Model ......................... 13 

Figure 4. Selection Panel–Jo Lynne Lehan, Ron Vincent, Jayan Sen, Frank Ferrara, and Judith 

Gertler, Moderator ................................................................................................................ 18 

Figure 5. Future Challenges Panel–Gary Lettengarver, Carl Barneyback, John Campbell, Leo 

McCann and Thomas Raslear, Moderator ............................................................................ 35 

Tables 

Table 1. Summary of Attendee Ratings....................................................................................... 41 

vii 

Acknowledgements 

This report presents a summary of a 1-day workshop, Railroad Dispatching Operations: Putting 

Research into Practice, which took place on September 30, 2004. The Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA) Office of Research and Development Human Factors Program sponsored 

this workshop under contract DTFR53-01-D-00029. 

The authors express their thanks to Mr. Michael Coplen, Office of Research and Development, 

for sponsoring this workshop and for providing guidance in planning and organizing the meeting. 

Dr. Thomas Raslear, another program manager for the Human Factors Program and a sponsor for 

many dispatcher research projects, provided additional suggestions in planning the meeting 

agenda. The authors are especially grateful to Mr. Grady Cothen, Acting FRA Associate 

Administrator for Safety, who took time from his busy schedule to attend the workshop and to 

welcome the participants to the workshop. 

Credit and thanks go to several Foster-Miller employees. Mr. Stephen Reinach contributed to 

the organization of the meeting and assisted in summarizing the participant feedback. Ms. Susan 

McDonough efficiently managed the workshop registration process and served as the onsite 

workshop coordinator. Four individuals from Foster-Miller’s publications department also 

contributed to the success of the workshop. Ms. Cynthia Black was responsible for the pre-event 

public relations. Ms. Gayle Staffiere designed the conference brochure, poster, and name tags 

and oversaw publication of the conference notebook. Ms. Pat Buchanan and Mr. Ed Blanchard 

were responsible for preparation of the CD included in the conference notebook. 

Most importantly the authors wish to thank all of the speakers and panelists who volunteered 

their time to be present and share their ideas and research. Their participation and enthusiasm 

made the day a success. And finally, thanks to all participants who, by attending the workshop, 

showed their interest in improving railroad dispatching operations. 

1

Executive Summary 

The findings of two Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) dispatching center audits, one in 

1987 and another in 1993, led FRA to undertake a program of research on a number of 

dispatching issues. This research program has included investigation of training requirements 

for dispatchers; selection of dispatcher candidates; dispatcher workload, stress, and fatigue; 

dispatcher taskload; dispatcher staffing and scheduling; and the development of a computerbased tool for visualizing train movements. Completion of the training requirements project led 

to FRA-sponsored dispatcher workshop, Train Dispatcher Training: Preparing for the 21st

Century, held in 1998. The purpose of a workshop held on September 30, 2004, in Scottsdale, 

AZ, was to share the results of subsequent dispatcher research with the railroad industry, as well 

as to showcase current industry-sponsored research and best practices. 

This document describes the proceedings of the 2004 workshop, which was sponsored by FRA’s 

Office of Research and Development Human Factors Program. A total of 63 people from the 

railroad industry, organized labor, government, and research organizations participated in the 

workshop. The workshop had the following goals: 

• Share most important findings of research on dispatching with railroad dispatching center 

management and labor. 

• Provide a forum for railroad industry representatives to share their successes and 

experiences in management of dispatching operations. 

• Provide an opportunity to learn about best practices from other types of dispatching 

operations. 

• Identify problem areas where additional research is needed. 

• Prioritize research needs. 

Relationship to FRA Human Factors Program 

FRA’s Human Factors Program follows two operational areas of railroading: Railroad Systems 

and Operations, and Grade Crossings and Trespassers. Within each area three subprograms 

exist: 

• Technology, including automation and systems design 

• Railway worker/operator performance, safety, and health 

• Organizational culture and safety performance 

FRA Human Factors Program has 10 strategic goals. This workshop has particular relevance to 

four of these goals, which are: 

• To promote the understanding, awareness, and utilization of human factors research in 

the railroad industry. 

• To broaden the base of expertise on railroad human factors by educating and supporting 

critical FRA Human Factors Research and Development Program stakeholders (e.g., 

Office of Safety, Volpe Center, railroad labor, and railroad management). 
2

• To establish a collaborative process that identifies and includes all key stakeholders in the 

conduct and application of human factors research, and in the evaluation of its impact in 

the railroad industry. 

• To develop and implement a methodical process for identifying and prioritizing 

important safety critical issues in human factors in the railroad industry. 

Presentations 

This 1-day workshop consisted of nine technical presentations and two panel discussions. The 

following summarizes highlights of each speaker’s presentation. 

Development of a Dispatcher Selection Program–FRA sponsored this study to understand 

current approaches to dispatcher trainee selection and to offer alternative tools and techniques 

especially for selecting dispatcher candidates with no prior railroad experience. A job analysis 

helped to identify the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) required for 

the job of a railroad dispatcher. Once the KSAOs were defined, methods for assessing 

candidates were identified. Case studies of seven dispatching operations provided information 

about each railroad’s current candidate recruitment and selection process and formed the basis 

for recommended best practices. Recommended assessment methods include job previews, use 

of structured interviews by trained interviewers and the use of a thorough job analysis as the 

basis for any selection program. 

Panel Discussion: Development of a Dispatcher Selection Program–Representatives from two 

Class I railroads, one commuter and one regional railroad, described their approaches to 

recruitment and selection of dispatchers. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) 

developed its own test instrument based on a job analysis. BNSF’s overall process has the 

following steps: screening, job preview, testing, interviews, medical, drug screen, and 

background check. The Union Pacific Railroad (UP) is currently examining its recruitment and 

selection process in an effort to increase retention levels. They currently seek candidates with 

prior railroad experience, experience as a dispatcher, or experience as an air traffic controller. 

The UP selection and training process is similar to that of BNSF. Metro-North Railroad 

developed its own selection tests. They are now in the process of developing an in-house 

training program that will allow them to hire dispatcher trainees without rules knowledge. The 

representative from the Portland & Western (P&W) Railroad described the approach of the 

Genesee & Wyoming, P&W’s parent company, to developing KSAOs for their dispatchers. 

Across the Genesee & Wyoming system, many dispatchers will be retiring in the coming years, 

and the company recognizes the need for a systematic recruitment and selection process. Several 

speakers on this panel, as well as workshop attendees, mentioned the challenge of dispatcher 

retention. Some suggested that increased starting pay may help to attract qualified candidates to 

this craft. 

Dispatcher Workload, Stress, and Fatigue–FRA initiated a multiyear study of railroad dispatcher 

workload, stress, and fatigue in response to concerns that arose from an FRA Office of Safety 

audit of U.S. dispatching operations, dispatcher-caused accidents, and a concern for dispatchers’ 

health and well-being. The purpose of the study was to identify sources of dispatcher workload, 

stress, and fatigue and to evaluate methods for measuring these outcomes. A total of 37 

dispatchers, 20 from a freight operation and 17 from a commuter operation, volunteered to 

participate in this study. Volunteers provided data across all shifts over a 2-week (wk) period. 
3

Subjective measures of workload appeared to be independent of the objective measures and did 

not reveal perceptions of excessively high workload in the aggregate. Overall, most of the 

reported stressors were not directly related to workload, and subjective stress generally increased 

through the shift. Cortisol levels, a physiological measure of stress, were within adult norms and 

followed a circadian pattern. The frequency of measurement may not have been adequate to 

detect physiological response to a stressful workplace event. As with other shift work 

populations, the dispatchers on the night shift had the shortest nighttime sleep, but when their 

nap periods were added, total daily sleep was the same as those working days. The study did not 

reveal any significant sleep debt. 

Fatigue Management Behaviors: Effects of Feedback from Performance Actigraphs–This 

research evaluated the use of feedback actigraphs in helping dispatchers manage fatigue. The 

study involved 35 volunteer dispatchers who wore actigraphs for three 30-day periods. In the 

first trial period participants wore the actigraphs to establish baseline data. In second trial they 

wore feedback actigraphs that provided data on the need for sleep. The results for this period 

indicated that participants modified their sleep patterns and increased their sleep time by 

10 percent. In the third trial, however, when they wore the non-feedback models again, they 

tended to revert to the sleep patterns exhibited in the first trial. This technology shows promise 

as an effective fatigue countermeasure, but more research is needed to establish the most 

effective way to implement it. 

The 21st Century Short Line Dispatching Center–The American Rail Dispatching Center 

(ARDC), a wholly owned subsidiary of RailAmerica, began operation in 2003. The center 

controls rail traffic for both short line and Class I railroads in 19 states. They are active in 

emergency response and preparedness training and have developed relationships with first 

responder and rescue personnel along the right-of-way. In selecting its dispatching system, 

ARDC selected one that could be expanded as their operation grows. 

European Dispatching Operations–European passenger and freight operations differ on many 

levels from their American counterparts. As a result, European dispatching operations also differ 

in many respects. The European dispatcher’s sole job is to regulate traffic. Local operators 

control the interlockings. Because the entire European rail network is now operated under open 

access, train operations are controlled by train operating companies, and infrastructure 

companies are responsible for the scheduling of trains. The European dispatcher’s workstation is 

similar to that of U.S. dispatchers, but it also includes a stringline function to keep track of train 

movements. Training for European dispatchers is through a railroad trade school following high 

school. 

The Job of a Vessel Traffic Services Operator–The job of a Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Services 

(VTS) operator shares many similarities with that of a railroad dispatcher. The VTS operator 

manages ship traffic in and out of U.S. ports. Navigation rules and collision regulations 

(COLREG), similar to railroad rules, govern these movements. The VTS operator is the first 

responder to a ship collision. They must collect pertinent information, stabilize the scene, and 

notify responding agencies. VTS operators communicate over a busy radio network, monitor 

ship movements, and resolve conflicting paths, and in general they provide weather and other 

data to ship crews. Like railroad dispatchers, they have computer-based and sensor technology 

to assist them with their tasks. In contrast to dispatchers, many VTS operators work 12 hours (h) 

on and 12 h off. Within each watch shift, VTS operators have a break after every 1 h on duty. 
4

Dispatcher Taskload Assessment Tool–The first phase of this project involved determining the 

requirements for a dispatcher taskload assessment tool and the appropriate data collection 

methods. Based on a survey of stakeholders, six primary dispatcher tasks were identified. For 

each task, the survey participants ranked the candidate methods of data collection. Data on 

observable dispatcher tasks can serve as the building blocks for a taskload assessment tool, but 

because of the high cognitive content of the job, basing such a tool solely on these data will be 

inadequate. Data collected as part of this project led to the development of a preliminary model 

of dispatcher performance. 

Understanding How Dispatchers Manage and Control Trains–This study employed a cognitive 

task analysis (CTA) to identify the sources of expertise or skills that dispatchers possess. The 

CTA revealed that dispatchers use a variety of expert strategies (e.g., cheat sheets and streets 

maps) to meet task demands. They continually anticipate and plan ahead. The results have 

implications for the design of advanced displays and decision aids, data link technology, and 

training. 

Visualizing Railroad Operations: A Tool for Traffic Planners and Dispatchers–This “proof of 

concept” software tool, which utilizes stringline diagrams, was initially designed for traffic 

planners, but it also has potential use as a training tool for dispatchers. It can help users compare 

different routing options, identify windows of opportunity, and set more realistic expectations for 

customers and other railroads. 

Panel Discussion: Future Challenges and Research Needs–Representatives from railroad labor, 

a Class I railroad, a short line railroad, and a commuter railroad each presented their perspectives 

on the future challenges and research needs relative to dispatching. The labor representative 

emphasized the need to continue to improve training and to professionalize the position of 

dispatcher in railroading. The Class I representative from CSX described his railroad’s challenge 

in upgrading its 1980s technology dispatching system. The short line representative from 

Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad addressed the challenges of joint dispatching operations. He 

cautioned that each situation is different and, as such, requires different strategies to make it 

successful. The commuter panelist from Metrolink also addressed the challenges of dispatcher 

training. 

Attendee Feedback 

A total of 33 (52 percent) workshop attendees completed the workshop evaluation form. Their 

feedback indicates that attendees found the content, organization, and utility of the information 

of exceptionally high quality and value. 

Important Issues 

Comments from workshop attendees and panelist remarks suggest that the following are areas 

where additional research should be considered: 

• Recruitment and selection of dispatcher candidates 

• Retention of dispatchers 

• Critical incident skills training 

• Impact of positive train control 

• Integration of new technology 
5

• Dispatcher as a team member 

• Dispatcher work schedules and sleep patterns 

• Stress reduction techniques 

• Joint dispatching operations 

Recommendations 

The experiences of this workshop and the feedback from attendees led to two recommendations. 

The first, concerning future workshops, is that FRA should consider a regular program of 

workshops, perhaps expanding beyond just dispatchers. Future workshops should include more 

industry representatives and be expanded to 11⁄2 d. The second recommendation is that FRA 

consider new dispatcher research that focuses on the following topics: development of an 

interactive dispatching simulator, retention strategies, team cognitive task analysis, work 

schedules and sleep patterns, stress reduction techniques, and critical incident skills training. 

7

1. Introduction 

The findings of two FRA dispatching center audits, one in 1987 and another in 1993, led FRA to 

undertake a program of research on a number of dispatching issues. The purpose of a workshop 

held on September 30, 2004, in Scottsdale, AZ, was to share the results of this program of 

research with the railroad industry, as well as to showcase industry-sponsored research and best 

practices. This document describes the proceedings of this workshop, which FRA’s Office of 

Research and Development Human Factors Program sponsored. A total of 63 people from the 

railroad industry, organized labor, government, and research organizations participated in the 

workshop. 

1.1 Background 

The past 20 years (yr) have seen significant changes in the job of a railroad dispatcher. From the 

technology perspective, the availability of affordable computer systems has made computeraided dispatching (CAD) feasible for many railroads, not just the Class I railroads. Improved 

communications systems led to the acceptance of radio transmitted directives in place of the 

traditional operator delivered train orders that had been used for over 100 yr. These changes in 

communications and signal technology have also resulted in the closing of block towers, 

eliminating the job of tower operator, a job on the career path to becoming a dispatcher. Today’s 

dispatcher is likely to use multiple computer screens and work with a keyboard and mouse in 

addition to a communications system. But not all dispatching operations can be characterized as 

high tech. A short line railroad may still use hand-written or verbal authorities to move trains 

across dark (unsignalled) territory. 

The industry’s adoption of new dispatching technology, changes in operating rules and methods 

of operation, and railroad industry restructuring all had potential safety consequences. In 

addition, excessive workloads and increases in occupational stress could result from any of these 

factors. For these reasons, in 1987-1988, FRA conducted the National Train Dispatcher Safety 

Assessment.1

 Both this audit and the subsequent Train Dispatchers Follow-up Review in 1993 

raised concerns about stress, workload, and fatigue of train dispatchers.2

 These audits also 

expressed concern that in the coming years a potential for reduced safety existed due to 

insufficient dispatching training and testing standards. In response to the findings of the 

dispatcher audits, in 1996 FRA Office of Research and Development initiated a program of 

research focusing on dispatching operations. 

The first project under this research program focused on training requirements for railroad 

dispatchers. Completion of the training requirements project led to FRA-sponsored dispatcher 

workshop, Train Dispatcher Training: Preparing for the 21st Century, held in 1998. One 

concern raised by workshop participants in 1998 was that due to the closing of towers, railroads 

were faced with hiring dispatchers with no prior railroad experience. Workshop participants 

 

1

 Federal Railroad Administration. (1990). National Train Dispatcher Safety Assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Transportation. 

2

 Federal Railroad Administration. (1995). National Train Dispatcher’s Follow-up Review. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Transportation. 
8

unanimously agreed that they needed selection criteria and methods to help them recruit and 

evaluate dispatcher candidates. Subsequent to this workshop, FRA initiated a project on 

selection of dispatcher candidates, which is one of the studies presented at the workshop 

described in this report. Since 1996 the FRA dispatcher research program has grown to include 

study of dispatcher workload, stress, and fatigue; dispatcher taskload; dispatcher staffing and 

scheduling; and the development of a computer-based tool for visualizing train movements. 

Two factors led FRA to sponsor a second dispatcher workshop. First, the 1998 workshop proved 

successful as a means to seek industry input on operational issues requiring research. Second, 

and perhaps more important, the workshop format provides the means to disseminate the results 

of FRA-sponsored dispatcher research, as well as to get firsthand feedback from FRA Office of 

Research and Development’s customers on that work. 

1.2 Workshop Goals 

The workshop had the following goals: 

• Share the most important findings of research on dispatching with railroad dispatching 

center management and labor. 

• Provide a forum for railroad industry representatives to share their successes and 

experiences in management of dispatching operations. 

• Provide an opportunity to learn about best practices from other types of dispatching 

operations. 

• Identify problem areas where additional research is needed. 

• Prioritize research needs. 

1.3 Organization of the Report 

Section 2 provides an overview of FRA Human Factors Research and Development (R&D) 

Program and explains how the workshop fits into the overall program. Section 3 includes 

summaries of each technical presentation and the two panel discussions. Section 4 summarizes 

participant feedback. Discussion at the workshop led to the identification of the important issues 

presented in Section 5. Section 6 presents recommendations with regard to future workshops 

and research. Appendix A contains the workshop agenda, and Appendix B provides the list of 

attendees. Speaker biographies are in Appendix C, and copies of each speaker’s slides are in 

Appendix D. Appendix E contains a bibliography of dispatcher research. A list of abbreviations 

and a glossary follow the appendices. 
9

2. FRA’s Human Factors R&D Program 

This section describes FRA Human Factors R&D Program, including its structural framework 

and strategic planning. The broad goals of this program are to improve rail transportation safety 

and mobility. These goals are achieved through research, dissemination of research results, and 

ongoing program evaluation. The workshop was one means of disseminating research results 

and obtaining industry evaluation of the portion of the program that concerns dispatching 

operations. 

2.1 Program Overview 

Human factors accidents in the railroad industry occur in two areas: Railroad Systems and 

Operations, and Grade Crossings and Trespassers. The organization of the Human Factors R&D 

Program follows these two operational areas. In each area the following three subprograms exist 

(see Figure 1): 

• Technology, including automation and systems design 

• Railway worker/operator performance, safety, and health 

• Organizational culture and safety performance 

Specific projects support each program area/subprogram. Strategic planning and other 

programmatic activities help knit the entire program together, including the prioritization and 

selection of research projects, ongoing planning, coordination, development, and evaluation of 

the program activities. Periodic assessments of the legal, regulatory, and sociological barriers in 

the industry provide the necessary contextual understanding needed for building long-term 

collaborative research and evaluation partnerships. In addition, strategic planning and contextual 

assessments help increase the feasibility, utilization, and overall positive impact of the program. 

2.2 Mission and Vision 

The mission of FRA Human Factors R&D Program is: 

To use the scientific method, the science of human factors research, and program evaluation 

standards to systematically improve safety and mobility in the U.S. railroad industry. 

The vision for the program is: 

To become an international center for excellence in railroad human factors research in the 

next 5 years. 

2.3 Key Functions 

FRA defines the following four key functions for its Human Factors R&D Program: 

• Provide technical, analytical, and scientific support to Office of Safety policy makers 

and other key agency decision makers (e.g., Railroad Safety Advisoty Committee 

(RSAC) and Safety Assurance and Compliance Program (SACP) activities). 
10

Figure 1. Structure of Human Factors R&D Program 

• Initiate innovative, collaborative, scientifically-based research and evaluation programs 

that lead to significant industry-wide reductions in the number of accidents, injuries, and 

deaths related to human error in railroad operations and railroad systems design. 

• Evaluate the utilization, impact, and effectiveness of human factors-related safety 

initiatives to systematically determine the cost and safety benefit of these initiatives. 

• Collaborate with interagency, interdepartment, intergovernment, and other nongovernment research institutions (e.g., National Institute for Occupational Safety and 

Health (NIOSH)) on cross-cutting research and evaluation programs, as well as the 

development and application of human factors standards (e.g., International Standards 

Organization (ISO)). 

2.4 Strategic Goals 

FRA Human Factors R&D Program has the following strategic goals: 

1) To develop and implement a methodical process for identifying and prioritizing 

important safety critical issues in human factors in the railroad industry. 

2) To develop and implement scientific methodologies that systematically measure, analyze, 

and monitor safety critical trends in human factors in the railroad industry. 

3) To prioritize and set specific target reduction goals (in cooperation with the Office of 

Safety) for human factors accidents, injuries, and deaths in railroad operations. 

4) To promote the understanding, awareness, and utilization of human factors research in 

the railroad industry. 
11

5) To broaden the base of expertise on railroad human factors by educating and supporting 

critical FRA Human Factors R&D Program stakeholders (e.g., Office of Safety, Volpe 

Center, railroad labor, and railroad management). 

6) To establish a collaborative process that identifies and includes all key stakeholders in the 

conduct and application of human factors research, as well as in the evaluation of its 

impact in the railroad industry. 

7) To develop and implement systematic methodologies for continuously measuring and 

evaluating human factors program performance (i.e., outcomes, impact, and effectiveness 

of human factors research) in the railroad industry. 

8) To develop and implement performance-based guidelines on Program Evaluation 

Standards for utility, feasibility, propriety, and accuracy of human factors applications in 

the railroad industry, and to institutionalize a process for how FRA’s Human Factors 

Program meets those standards. 

9) To enhance critical human factors program areas, such as positive train control, behaviorbased safety, digital communications, and fatigue. 

10) To create and coordinate railroad human factors research partnerships with key academic, 

government, industry, and community stakeholders, both nationally and internationally, 

as a means to leverage resources and establish international prominence in the field. 

This workshop has particular relevance to four of these goals. Perhaps most important, this 

workshop provided a means to disseminate the results of FRA research programs (goal 5) and 

facilitate industry utilization of this information (goal 4). Feedback from workshop participants 

will help FRA to identify and prioritize safety critical issues (goal 1). The discussions that 

occurred at the workshop were a collaborative process where stakeholders commented on the 

value of the various research projects (goal 6). 

2.5 Human Factors Research in a Socio-Technical System 

Human factors research can be seen as part of a human-centered systems approach, which 

focuses on human capabilities and limitations with respect to human/system interfaces, 

operations, system integration, and organizational influences on safety. Increased attention to 

human performance and behavior using a systems approach will reduce crashes, loss of life, 

injuries, property damage, and resultant personal and financial costs. The Human Factors R&D 

Program follows a systems model based on Neville Moray’s Structure of Socio-Technical 

Systems, shown in Figure 2. In this model of nested influences, each layer encompasses the 

content of inner layers.3

 

The Human Factors Program R&D includes three layers. The contextual factors, which 

influence research and development, are the outer layer: Social, Legal, and Regulatory Context. 

As shown in Figure 1, the Human Factors R&D Program has two broad program areas: Railroad 

Systems and Operations, and Grade Crossings and Trespassers. Grade Crossings are a special 

case of a Physical System, since they involve both railroad and highway vehicles and 

infrastructure. Grade Crossings are considered apart from Railroad Systems but have all the 

same layers in the structure illustrated in Figure 2. Each of the two program areas has 

subprogram elements that correspond to the layers identified above. Specifically these 

subprogram elements are Organizational Culture and Safety Performance; Railway Worker and 

 

3 Moray, N. (2000). Culture, politics and ergonomics. Ergonomics, 43(7), 858-868.
12

Figure 2. Human Factors Program in Relation to Elements of a Socio-Technical System 

Operator Performance; and Technology, Automation, and Systems Design. This is a systems 

approach to dealing with human factors issues. It is important to remember that outer layers of 

FRAmework contain elements of inner layers and influence the inner layers. This gives the 

program elements a great deal of interconnectivity. 

The human factors R&D Program consists of several subprogram elements that form a 

systematic, multilayered approach to enhancing the safety of railroad operations. The core 

elements of the program are the physical systems (e.g., a locomotive) that individuals interact 

with to perform their jobs. Physical system characteristics (e.g., displays and controls) affect 

how individuals interact with the system to perform their jobs. Changes in physical systems 

cause changes in how jobs are performed and affect safety. Individuals perform their jobs within 

the context of personal (biological and psychological), environmental, and social conditions that 

affect job performance and safety. Teams of individuals communicate, coordinate, and 

cooperate to perform inter-related tasks on various physical systems to achieve a common goal 

(e.g., move a train between two locations). This teamwork is performed within the context of 

group dynamics that affect task performance, safety, and goal attainment. Teams set goals and 

engage in communication, coordination, and cooperation to meet those goals in accordance with 

organizational values and assumptions about appropriate goals (e.g., productivity versus safety), 

communication, coordination, and cooperation. Organizational culture affects team and 

individual job performance, physical system design, and safety. Organizational behavior is 

influenced by laws and regulations and by societal and cultural pressures. 

FRA is working on a model for prioritizing its research program to assure that it is relevant for 

the industry. This workshop plays a role in this process in two ways. As shown in Figure 3, 

FRA uses information from a variety of sources to establish project priorities. Stakeholder input 

is especially important. Workshops such as this one are a means for FRA to obtain stakeholder 

input to help prioritize the Human Factors R&D Program. FRA selects the various projects for 

its Human Factors R&D Program with the goals of improving safety, increasing productivity, 

developing technology products, and meeting stakeholder needs. One measure that FRA uses to 
13

Figure 3. Human Factors Research Prioritization and Project Selection Model 

judge the success of its program is the extent to which industry stakeholders use the results of 

FRA-sponsored research. This type of workshop may lead to increased utilization of the 

research. 

15

3. Presentations 

This section provides summaries of each of the nine presentations and two panel sessions. 

Appendix C contains a biographical sketch for each speaker and panelist, and Appendix D 

contains copies of each speaker’s slides. 

3.1 Development of a Dispatcher Selection Program (Judith Gertler) 

Based on feedback from participants at a 1998 FRA-sponsored workshop where dispatcher 

training issues were discussed, FRA initiated this research project. The objectives of the project 

were to understand railroad industry approaches to dispatcher trainee selection and to offer 

alternative tools and techniques, especially for evaluating and selecting dispatcher candidates 

with no prior railroad experience. 

Background–Advances in communications technology have all but eliminated the need for tower 

operators. With the closing of control towers, the industry’s in-house source of dispatcher 

candidates is all but gone, causing railroads to recruit individuals with no prior experience. The 

training of a dispatcher costs upwards of $50,000 and takes a minimum of 6 mo. Because of the 

railroad’s significant investment in each candidate, selection of suitable dispatcher candidates is 

an important decision. 

Process for developing a selection program–Development of a selection program requires a 

focused effort. The organization wants to be certain that the information that is collected from 

applicants is closely related to job performance and that the information is effectively used to 

identify the best candidates for the position. The process for development of a selection program 

has four steps: job analysis, employee specification, assessment instrument 

development/identification, and validation. 

The first step, a job analysis, is a systematic process for identifying tasks, duties, responsibilities, 

and working conditions. The results of the job analysis are used to determine the KSAOs that an 

employee must possess to perform the job. This is the employee specification step. Once the 

KSAOs are known, it is possible to identify and validate appropriate selection instruments and 

methods for the position. The instruments must measure the relevant KSAOs and must help to 

differentiate among candidate dispatchers. Validation assures that the identified characteristics 

are related to job performance. Once the selection methods have been validated, the selection 

program is ready for implementation. This study focused on the first three steps of the selection 

program development process. 

The Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ®), a widely used systematic methodology for 

conducting a job analysis, was selected to develop a generic description of the job of railroad 

dispatcher. The PAQ begins with a description of the position to be analyzed. The job 

description from an earlier FRA-sponsored study, Training Requirements for Railroad 

Dispatchers, was used. The next step was a series of structured group interviews with 36 

dispatchers from four different dispatching centers. The PAQ methodology takes the results of 

these interviews and characterizes work behaviors, such as color perception, supervision of track 

occupants, and use of remotely controlled equipment. The PAQ methodology also provides 

information about job dimensions, such as the amount of information that has to be processed, 

the mental processes that are involved, and relationships with other people. 
16

The PAQ job analysis indicated that simple reaction time was the only significant psychomotor 

skill required of a dispatcher. No significant physical skill requirements existed. In terms of 

abilities, the PAQ identifies three categories of abilities: sensory, perceptual, and cognitive. 

Auditory acuity was the most important sensory ability. The dispatcher’s need to deal with 

peaks in workload, characterized by multiple sources of information, rapidly changing 

conditions, and the need for decisiveness, was reflected in the PAQ-identified perceptual abilities 

of closure, perceptual speed, selective attention, and time sharing. The job of railroad dispatcher 

requires seven cognitive abilities, including short-term memory, long-term memory, intelligence, 

and convergent thinking. 

In terms of other characteristics, the PAQ job analysis identified two significant interest 

characteristics and a total of seven temperament characteristics. A dispatcher should have 

interest in directing/controlling/planning and a variety of duties. With respect to temperament, 

the two most important characteristics are working under pressure of time and attainment of set 

standards. 

Assessment methods–Candidate assessment methods include interviews, biodata questionnaires, 

references, and tests. Interviews are most suitable for assessing personal relations, good 

citizenship, and job knowledge. An effective interview should be structured and should be 

conducted by a skilled, trained interviewer. A biodata inventory is an application blank that 

collects job-related factual information from the candidate. Each question is weighted to reflect 

its predictive value in differentiating good from poor performers. All items must deal with 

events under the applicant’s control. For example, the names of prior employers may be 

obtained, but the applicant cannot be asked about his/her birthplace or names of family members. 

The biodata inventory is easy to administer, but developing a validated instrument is time 

consuming and can be costly. 

Successful railroad strategies–Site visits to seven dispatching centers, representing Class I, 

commuter, and short line/regional railroads, provided information about each railroad’s current 

candidate recruitment and selection process. The size of these dispatcher centers ranged from 24 

to 485 dispatchers, and the number of desks ranged from 3 to close to 100. All seven railroads 

use interviews and selection by committee consensus; five use structured interviews. Five of the 

railroads use some type of test instrument. The two Class I railroads use a dispatcher aptitude 

test instrument that was developed specifically for their organization. 

Some innovative strategies are worthy of note. UP uses internet job postings but warns that if 

the posting is left up too long, there are a large number of resumes to review. LIRR employs a 

pre-screen process that involves testing candidates for their ability to learn railroad terminology. 

The overall selection procedure used by the seven centers begins with screening of candidates for 

minimum education and experience. Those meeting the education and experience requirements 

may be screened with an ability test. Those who pass the ability test are brought back for a series 

of interviews. Finally, a selection panel, consisting of someone from HR and one or two people 

from the operating department, selects from among the candidates. 

Potential sources of dispatcher candidates–This research used two methods to identify 

occupations that may be potential sources of dispatcher candidates. The PAQ methodology 

provided one set of occupations, and a U.S. Department of Labor occupational database allowed 

for the identification of additional similar occupations. Occupations in the protective services, 

transportation, mining, and utilities industries have skill and ability requirements similar to that 
17

of the railroad dispatcher. These occupations include fire alarm operator, radio dispatcher, 

protective-signal operator, interstate bus dispatcher, traffic or system dispatcher, dispatcher 

(mine and quarry), and oil dispatcher. 

Conclusions and recommendations–Conclusions and recommendations with regard to the 

development and implementation of a selection program for railroad dispatcher candidates 

include the following: 

• A thorough job analysis should be the foundation for any railroad dispatcher selection 

program. The results of the composite job analysis conducted as part of this research can 

be a starting point for organizations lacking resources to conduct a job analysis. 

• Structured interviews are preferable over unstructured interviews because they have been 

shown to have higher predictive validity. 

• Only reliable test instruments and procedures should be included in a dispatcher selection 

program. 

• An intensive job preview of the dispatcher’s job and work environment may help to 

identify those candidates not suited to the requirements of the job. 

• Occupations in the protective services, transportation, utilities, and mining industries that 

have job requirements similar to those of a railroad dispatcher are a potential source of 

dispatcher candidates. 

3.2 Panel Discussion: Development of a Dispatcher Selection Program 

The purpose of this panel was to provide a forum for representatives of the railroads that were 

case studies for the dispatcher selection project, summarized above, to describe their approach to 

recruitment and selection of dispatchers (see Figure 4). Panelists were asked to discuss any or all 

of the following topics: 

• Describe your railroad’s approach to recruitment and selection of dispatchers and why 

these have worked. What lessons learned have you had over the years? 

• If you use any test instruments, explain how you developed and validated them. 

• What challenges, if any, do you anticipate in the coming years in recruiting and selecting 

dispatchers? 

• Comment on the report, Selection of Dispatcher Candidates. In what ways is this type of 

report helpful to your railroad? 

Frank Ferrara, Metro-North Railroad 

Metro-North’s Operations Control Center (OCC) dispatches over 600 trains daily on three lines. 

The OCC has a staff of 59 rail traffic controllers (RTC), including four management chiefs and 

six assistant chiefs.4

 The RTCs also dispatch three branch lines in Connecticut, of which two are 

manual block. 

 

4

 Metro-North refers to their dispatchers as rail traffic controllers. 
18

Figure 4. Selection Panel–Jo Lynne Lehan, Ron Vincent, Jayan Sen, Frank Ferrara, and 

Judith Gertler, Moderator 

In the 1980s, incumbent RTCs recommended tower operators to become RTCs. As the towers 

closed, the pool of qualified candidates shrunk. Metro-North realized that it needed new 

methods for recruiting and selecting candidates. The opening of the OCC in 1993 was a 

significant change for Metro-North. Prior to the cutover to the OCC, six towers with 19 

operators per shift existed. With the OCC, it was now possible for four RTCs to handle this 

entire workload. Metro-North found it necessary to hire 21 new dispatchers as it expanded from 

6 to 10 districts under the control of the OCC. 

Metro-North’s HR department led the effort to develop new selection methods. After observing 

dispatchers for 3 to 4 mo, they were able to identify the duties, tasks, and behaviors associated 

with the job. Prototype tests were developed and given to interviewees. The final test battery 

consists of three tests: vocabulary, ship destination test, and selective audio test. The vocabulary 

test is based on the book of rules. The ship destination test was purchased from a test publisher. 

The audio test measures hearing acuity and the ability to follow instructions. 

Metro-North procedures require that a position be vacant before recruiting for a replacement. 

Internal candidates must have a minimum of 2 yr of experience in a craft that requires knowledge 

of the book of rules. Outside candidates must be qualified dispatchers. 

Metro-North has had only 20 percent of candidates pass the tests. Most failures occur on 

following instructions. Both HR and the Chief Rail Traffic Controller interview those candidates 

who pass the tests. 

Without a formal training program for RTCs, Metro-North has been unable to hire people 

without a rules background. The challenge at this point is to move away from the 2-yr rules 

experience requirement. Specifically, Metro-North is taking steps to develop a selection and 

6-month (mo) training program, similar to that for locomotive engineers, which is open to all 

Metro-North employees with 2 yr of railroad experience. Metro-North is currently looking at job 

requirements and how they could be changed to enhance the selection process. 
19

Another challenge for Metro-North is selling the job to the work force. 

Metro-North has used the results of two FRA-sponsored research projects in improving its 

dispatcher selection and training program. The reports that Mr. Ferrara mentioned are Training 

Requirements for Railroad Dispatchers: Objectives, Syllabi and Test Designs and Selection of 

Railroad Dispatcher Candidates. He said, 

We have referred to both [the selection report] and the training report. Both 

documents have proved to be beneficial in developing an outline for our new 

training program. The Selection of Dispatcher Candidates report has helped us 

revamp the job requirements for candidates for our future training program. The 

job analysis section has been particularly helpful in bringing an understanding of 

the job to such departments as personnel, employment, and labor relations. The 

training requirements report is being used to develop the new training syllabus. 

Jayan Sen–BNSF 

In the early 1990s, the BNSF determined that it needed a more systematic approach to selection 

of dispatchers. From the start of the process to develop a new selection program, BNSF tried to 

get as many stakeholders involved as possible. They sought input from union leaders, job 

incumbents, and chief dispatchers. 

The first step was a comprehensive job analysis. BNSF looked at the importance of each task, 

frequency of performance, importance of skill requirements, estimates of skill level, and the 

work environment. Rather than choosing a more general method like the PAQ, BNSF, working 

with an outside firm, developed its own format for the job analysis. 

The job task profile resulting from this analysis showed that managing conflicting demands and 

reviewing written information were extremely important. Other important skills were reporting 

and documenting, language skills, analytic skills, perceptual skills, and interaction skills. 

Computer skills are important and will continue to be important as technology continues to 

change. Mr. Sen commented that BNSF needs to find a way to measure and reinforce computer 

skills. The work environment factors identified by the job analysis were frequent distractions, 

alertness, workload variation, precision, repetitive work, and time pressure. 

Based on the job analysis, BNSF developed and validated a test battery. Working dispatchers 

were used to establish norms for the tests. The test battery was designed to measure the four 

dimensions that accounted for 92 percent of job performance: 1) learning, problem solving, and 

handling information; 2) attention to safety; 3) performing calculations and analytic skills; and 

4) communication and teamwork. The four specific tests are troubleshooting; job orientation, 

which measures work orientation, stability, and agreeableness; coding; and workplace practices 

test. The tests have been shown to have minimal adverse impact, a concern in terms of job 

discrimination. 

Before testing, dispatcher candidates are given a realistic job preview. Some may select out at 

this point. Individuals who pass the four tests participate in a structured panel interview. The 

structured interview is designed to capture job dimensions that are not measured by the tests. 

These dimensions include interaction skills, memory, problem solving, and judgment. 

The overall BNSF process has the following steps: screening, job preview, testing, interviews, 

medical, drug screen, and background check. The BNSF process incorporates the recommended 

practices of Selection of Dispatcher Candidates. 
20

Jo Lynne Lehan, UP 

UP currently has a dispatcher retention problem. Between January 1999 and May 2004, 

8 percent of dispatcher trainees failed during training, 7 percent were subsequently dismissed for 

poor performance, and 20 percent resigned or exercised seniority in other crafts. As a result, UP 

is examining its recruitment and selection process in an effort to increase retention levels. 

UP looks for dispatcher candidates with railroad experience, experience as a dispatcher, air 

traffic controller, or military logistics. They look for 4 yr of railroad experience or 4 yr of 

management experience in any industry. Candidates with a bachelors degree in transportation, 

logistics, business administration, or economics are preferred. 

Work ethic characteristics are important to UP. Specifically it looks at an individual’s 

experience handling multiple jobs concurrently, working through college, maturity, and 

motivation during periods of unemployment. This information is obtained through the interview 

process, the candidate’s work history, and legacy referrals. The interview process also provides 

a means to assess dispatching issues, such as attention to detail, adherence to predetermined rules 

and policies, planning and coordination skills, and the decisiveness and assertiveness of the 

candidate. 

UP is currently looking at pay levels for dispatchers. Of particular concern is starting pay. 

An individual’s ability to adapt to the lifestyle of a dispatcher is an important consideration. A 

realistic job preview is part of the screening process and helps to assess this factor. Ms. Lehan 

reported that in a recent group of dispatcher candidates, one individual walked out after realizing 

the reality of working nights. 

Currently UP is looking for degreed candidates in maintenance-of-way, mechanical, clerical, and 

train service jobs. 

The UP selection and training process has the following steps: 

• Human Resources (HR) Department representatives and staff members from Harriman 

Dispatching Center (HDC) review and select top candidates from internet applications. 

• HR administers the management test and selects top candidates for interviews. 

• Four managers of train dispatchers and four managers with dispatching experience or 

active train dispatchers constitute the HDC interview team. The interview team 

interviews the top candidates, selecting the best to become apprentice dispatchers. 

• Apprentice dispatchers complete 3 mo of training and 3 mo of on-the-job training (OJT). 

• After completing the OJT, the employee works for 4 to 6 wk followed by a territory 

familiarization trip. 

Ron Vincent, P&W, a Genesee & Wyoming Company

P&W operates 588 miles (mi) of track, all of it dark territory that is under track warrant control 

(TWC). Four trick dispatchers and one chief dispatcher control train movements on the system. 

The railroad is currently experimenting with a global positioning system (GPS) to aid dispatchers 

in locating locomotives. 

When the railroad began operation, two experienced dispatchers were hired. Train volume was 

low enough that they only worked 5 days (d) per wk. On weekends the two dispatchers took 
21

turns coming into the office for a few hours each day to issue train orders. Eventually business 

grew but not to the extent that a third dispatcher was required. The company created the position 

of trainman/train dispatcher extra board. When an extra dispatcher was needed, individuals from 

this extra board filled in. Otherwise they worked as trainmen. This solution worked for about 

2 yr at which time the two dispatchers retired. The railroad was fortunate to be able to hire two 

additional experienced dispatchers. As the operation grew to its present size, additional 

dispatchers were recruited from the customer service center. One requirement was that the 

candidate know General Code of Operating Rules (GCOR). 

Last year the Genesee & Wyoming parent company recognized that 75 percent of the dispatchers 

on its system would be retiring. The company assembled a meeting of supervisors, and, with the 

assistance of a consultant, it explored the job of dispatcher and related skills. The company 

defined six key elements of the recruitment and selection process: job descriptions, core 

competencies, methods to seek qualified applicants, elements of a behavioral interview, 

assessment testing, and references and background checks. Each railroad identified six 

additional skill sets that fit with their operation. P&W wants its dispatchers to have the 

following characteristics: good communications skills, adaptability, good organizational skills, 

good negotiating skills, database and computer skills, and initiative. Negotiating skills are 

important because the P&W dispatchers are also crew callers, and many times they must 

convince people to work at undesirable times. 

In the coming years P&W faces two major challenges. The first is to handle the projected 

growth in traffic, including operation of a commuter service. Technology will most likely have 

to be introduced. In addition, another 12 dispatchers will be needed to handle the increase in 

workload. The second challenge is finding a way to retain dispatchers. Current dispatchers do 

not appreciate the importance of their job and become bored. P&W has its dispatchers work 

with the train master and ride trains as a way for them to appreciate the job. Mr. Vincent 

surmised that if P&W had incorporated a more structured interview process, as recommended in 

Selection of Dispatcher Candidates, perhaps the dispatchers would not get so bored. 

3.3 Dispatcher Workload Stress and Fatigue (Stephen Popkin) 

In 1997 FRA initiated a multiyear study of railroad dispatcher workload, stress, and fatigue in 

response to concerns that arose from an FRA Office of Safety audit of U.S. dispatching 

operations, dispatcher-caused accidents, and a concern for dispatchers’ health and wellbeing. 

The purpose of the study was to identify sources of dispatcher workload, stress, and fatigue and 

to evaluate methods for measuring these outcomes. 

Methodology–The study was a naturalistic field study that involved observation and data 

collection in the workplace. Volunteers at two dispatching centers, one passenger and one 

freight, provided data across all shifts over a 2-wk period. The sample was one of convenience, 

not a statistically designed sample. In reviewing the study results, due to location specific 

characteristics and the limited sample size, results may not be representative of the overall U.S. 

dispatcher population. 

A variety of data collection instruments were used. A survey, completed before the data 

collection period, provided background information on the participants. The modified task 

analysis workload (mTAWL) methodology, originally developed to assess the workload of 

helicopter pilots, was used to assess workload. Because it is a labor-intensive method, not all 
22

dispatchers were observed. Workload was also measured through subjective ratings and 

dispatcher records. Subjective ratings were used for stress and fatigue throughout the workday. 

Analysis of salivary cortisol provided a physiological measure of stress. Actigraphy and sleep 

logs recorded sleep patterns and self-assessments of sleep quality and alertness. 

Once railroad management concurred on participation of their site in the study, participants were 

recruited. Participants collected data for 14 consecutive days, including rest days. At the end of 

the data collection period, they completed a debriefing survey to provide feedback on the study 

procedures. 

Demographics–A total of 37 dispatchers, 20 from a freight operation and 17 from a commuter 

operation, volunteered to participate in the study. They were, on average, overweight middle age 

males with 8 yr of dispatching experience. Education level ranged from a high school degree to 

an undergraduate college degree. Approximately 20 percent held a non-railroad job before 

becoming a dispatcher. 

In comparison with U.S. health norms, the younger dispatchers, ages 25 to 44, experienced back 

pain, headaches, and skin disorders at a significantly greater rate. The older group of dispatchers 

reported back pain, gastrointestinal problems, and headaches more frequently than U.S. norms. 

All of these medical problems could be indicative of stress. 

Workplace Context–In terms of the physical environment of the dispatching center, over half 

rated the air quality as unacceptable. Temperature was also a concern for slightly less than half. 

The majority of participants reported that their work schedule was 5 consecutive days. Over half 

reported working 8 or more h of overtime per week, and overall a quarter reported being 

“expected to work overtime.” A labor shortage at the time of the study was most likely the 

reason for these responses. 

When considering both commute time and time at work, dispatchers at the passenger operation 

had 11 h of work-related time each day. This leaves only 13 h in which to sleep, spend time with 

family, and conduct personal business. It is likely that many of these dispatchers compromise 

their sleep to accommodate work and personal demands. Statistical analysis of self-assessments 

of fatigue throughout the workday indicated that those with longer commute times tended to be 

more fatigued at work. 

Overall the dispatchers at the two sites felt that they rarely had to bend the rules to complete the 

job and were able to handle emergencies. They felt that they had a moderate or high level of 

control over work quality and task ordering but little control over policy decisions. 

Workload–The information from the mTAWL observations allowed for comparisons of relative 

workload of the desks within a center. This method appears to be suitable for documenting a 

desk suspected of having a workload imbalance, although the mTAWL process is quite labor 

intensive. Subjective measures of workload appeared to be independent of the objective 

measures (e.g., number of trains and other track users, number of Form Ds) and did not reveal 

perceptions of excessively high workload in the aggregate. 

Stress–Workplace stress has been documented in recent studies. In a 1995 NIOSH study of 

workplace stress, 40 percent of U.S. workers reported their job as very or extremely stressful, 

and 25 percent viewed their jobs as the major stressor in their lives. A 2000 Gallup poll 

documented workplace stress and incidence of verbal outbursts or other actions arising from this 

stress. The study revealed evidence of stress-related behavior in the dispatching center. Three 
23

quarters of the study participants reported that they “rarely” or “never” lost their temper at work, 

but 92 percent reported that other dispatchers “sometimes” or “frequently” lose their temper. 

In terms of individuals that the dispatcher interacts with, dispatchers reported the greatest levels 

of cooperation with the chief and train and engine crews but also reported conflict with train and 

engine crews and maintenance-of-way workers. Another indicator of work-related stress was the 

fact that a third of the participants reported sometimes or frequently calling in sick due to stress. 

Major sources of stress for novice dispatchers were “personality conflicts with crews” and 

“quality of workstation and equipment.” In contrast, the most senior dispatchers found “juggling 

T&E and MOW needs” the most stressful part of their jobs. Overall, most of the reported 

stressors were not directly related to workload, and subjective stress generally increased through 

the shift. Cortisol levels, the physiological measure of stress, were within adult norms and 

followed a circadian pattern. The frequency of measurement may not have been inadequate to 

detect physiological response to a stressful workplace event. 

Fatigue–Fatigue is a multidimensional issue. Time of day and time awake are the primary 

determinants of fatigue and thus account for increases in subjective fatigue with time on duty. 

As with other shift work populations, the dispatchers on the night shift had the shortest nighttime 

sleep, but when their nap periods were added, total daytime sleep was the same as those working 

days. Second shift dispatchers got the most sleep, averaging over 7 1⁄2 h daily. The study did not 

reveal any significant sleep debt. 

3.4 Fatigue Management Behaviors: Effects of Feedback from Performance 

Actigraphs (Patrick Sherry) 

Supported by a grant from FRA Office of Safety, the National Center for Intermodal 

Transportation, and BNSF, this research was conducted to help identify ways of improving 

individual sleep habits of dispatchers. Specifically, the purpose of this study was 1) to help 

assess whether or not people have the capacity to deal with the stress, demands, and fatigue that 

come with the dispatcher job and 2) to help identify ways in which dispatchers can lower stress 

and fatigue and deal with crisis and the demands of the job. 

Methodology–The data collection effort in this study focused on individual sleep cycles. Each 

participant was involved in three data collection trials. The objective of the data collection was 

to record sleep habits and identify ways to improve sleep hygiene. Sleep data was recorded 

using an actigraphy monitor, which is a wrist-worn device that detects motion. Actigraphs 

provide an objective assessment of the hours of sleep. In contrast, sleep diaries can be less 

accurate. The individual’s activity level indicates the work and rest schedule each day and can 

be used to predict fatigue. The monitor uses an algorithm to give the person a number indicating 

his/her fatigue level. This number is displayed on the watch face and is referred to as feedback. 

Ideally, the wearer adjusts his/her sleep schedule based on this feedback. 

This study involved three 30-d trials using actigraphy monitors. The first trial involved the 

participants wearing the actigraphy monitor to obtain sleep data. The feedback function was 

added to the second trial to give participants an indication of their fatigue levels throughout the 

day. The participants were instructed how to respond to their fatigue number. The third trial 

was a repeat of the baseline and did not include actigraphy feedback. 
24

Demographics–A total of four women and 31 men volunteered to participate in this study. Two 

women and 18 men completed all three trials. While several people from each shift volunteered, 

the majority were third shift. 

Results from Baseline Trial–Actigraphy data was collected from 18 volunteers. The participants 

wore the watch for 30 d without feedback. Each participant was given his/her own results on the 

baseline study and then asked how he/she could improve his/her sleep habits. The researchers 

taught the study participants how to identify problem areas, identify goals to be addressed, and 

use feedback from the watch. 

Because first and second shifts sleep at approximately the same time at night, the researchers 

combined both shifts into a day shift and left third shift as night. The average the day shift 

worker slept 5.51 h, and the average night shift worker slept 6.48 h. Typically day shift workers 

get more sleep than night shift; however, the people who volunteered for the study may have had 

more sleep issues than the average shift worker. 

Results from Second and Third Trials–During the second trial, the participants wore the feedback 

actigraphy watch for 30 d. At the end of the 30-d period, participants were asked how they 

would continue to change their sleep/rest habits. Finally, they wore the regular watch without 

feedback for 30 d to again record work and rest habits. 

From the data, it appears that the day shift improved from Trial 1 to Trial 2 and then went back 

to Trial 1 level during Trial 3. The night shift seemed to change very little between the first two 

trials but then improved in the last trial. It may be important to study habit change in different 

shifts in order to get a better idea of why the different shift workers responded differently to the 

trials in this study. The average amount of sleep of participants in this study increased by about 

10 percent. This, however, might change in further studies due to the variability of a larger 

sample. 

Participant Comments–The participants were asked to comment on the study and what they 

gained from wearing the watch. Participants found the following aspects of the study to be 

valuable: 

• The ability to keep track of fatigue 

• Learning about fatigue levels 

• Aware of sleeping habits and lack of adequate sleep 

• Knowledge of how they were dealing with fatigue and what they should be doing to 

improve their fatigue levels 

Overall, the participants reported liking the watch but did not always rate the device as 

particularly helpful. Suggested improvements included incorporating an alarm into the monitor 

to indicate to the wearer when it was time to take a nap. 

Future Research with Actigraphs–Dr. Sherry recommends that future efforts should focus on 

developing better measures of the improvements that people make in their personal fatigue 

management and integrating coaching with feedback technology. In addition, future efforts 

should address developing ways to identify people who are not suitable candidates for this 

fatigue countermeasure. 
25

Future research efforts should include exploring ways to use actigraphy as a fatigue 

countermeasure. Because all employees have the potential to suffer from fatigue issues, 

railroads should provide an intervention tailored to personnel not in train service. 

Management/supervisors should also be trained in fatigue management. 

3.5 The 21st Century Short Line Dispatching Center (Thomas Murphy) 

Background and Procedures–ARDC, a wholly owned subsidiary of RailAmerica, opened in 

2003. Located in Vermont, ARDC dispatches 17 railroads from New England to the Midwest, 

and down to the southern United States. The center controls rail traffic for both short line and 

Class I railroads on 3,000 mi of track in 19 states. The territory under ARDC’s control is 

growing each year. ARDC moves over 500,000 car loads annually with upwards of 200 crew 

starts each day. 

ARDC’s goal is to establish continuity in procedures and operating practices. The short lines are 

often behind the Class Is in dispatching technology, procedures, and other advancements. To 

help update the short line dispatching process, ARDC trains both dispatchers and other short line 

employees in the important core elements of train dispatching: bulletins, track warrants/track 

and time, radio communication, and rules compliance. ARCD also makes sure the C.F.R. § 

228.17 standards are met and that documentation and reporting takes place. Safety and 

efficiency are a result of trying to meet these goals. 

Safety–ARDC takes a serious and aggressive approach to safety within its company and along its 

tracks. No FRA reportable injuries or incidents have occurred since the start of operations in the 

facility. ARDC wants safety to be instilled as part of the employee mentality. Another service 

ARDC provides is 24 h/365 d a year emergency and safety coverage, as well as a hotline that 

services over 50 of its railroads. 

ARDC is active in emergency response and preparedness training and has developed 

relationships with the first responders and rescue personnel along the right-of-way. The 

dispatching center also hosts training sessions on emergency procedures as part of continuing 

education. These relationships and training to the emergency response community give the short 

lines extra support to help prevent accidents and assist in more rapid accident recovery. 

ARDC also assists its short line customers with efficiency testing. It has developed a program 

on operational testing for train dispatchers. 

Control Systems–In searching for a control system for ARDC, the following capabilities were 

important: 

• Redundancy backup (dual servers) 

• Full conflict checking and validation logic (mission critical) 

• Ability to manage mixed territory, as well as yards 

• Compatibility with GCOR 

• Additional modules, such as train sheets 

• Supports minimum of five workstations 

• Microsoft Windows Operating System 
26

ARDC was also looking for a scaleable platform that has full-featured desktop applications and 

complex networked system applications. 

Weather Alertness–Advanced and accurate weather information is critical for any railroad 

operation. ARDC uses WeatherData, a system which gives advanced warnings that are trackspecific through a program that incorporates latitude and longitude. WeatherData is content 

tailored to the railroad’s specific needs to enhance safety. Stopping or slowing trains costs 

money, so it is important that weather warnings are timely and railroad-specific. WeatherData 

gives warnings 20 min prior to weather events, and its staff is available around the clock for 

consulting. In addition, a WeatherData meteorologist will contact ARDC within 2 min of an 

unanswered alert. 

ARDC Safety and Service–ARDC strives to make a safe working environment for its employees, 

as well as to offer service to its railroads. It offers rail traffic control services and maintains 

personal relationships with each railroad. ARDC strives to afford even the smallest railroad 

greater safety, professional service, and efficiency. 

3.6 European Dispatching Operations (Joern Pachl) 

European passenger and freight operations differ on many levels from train service in North 

America. For this reason European dispatching also differs from its American counterparts. 

Dispatching in European railroad operations differs mainly in scheduling, traffic control 

principles, and the influence of open access. In addition, the qualification and training of a 

dispatcher plays a major role in distinguishing European from North American dispatchers. 

European Railroad Operations–European operations are predominately passenger trains. This is 

the opposite of railroad operations in North America. Passenger operations make up between 75 

and 80 percent of all European train miles. Freight trains typically carry less cargo and travel at 

higher speeds than North American freight trains. In addition, the average traffic density is 

about five times higher than in North America, with most lines having double tracks. Many 

passenger trains travel at speeds of up to 100 mph on traditional main lines. On high speed lines, 

such as Inter City Express (ICE) and Train à Grande Vitesse (TGV), travel speed goes up to 180 

mph. All train operations are entirely scheduled, with passenger trains often having clockface 

schedules. All mainline operation is signal-controlled. Even the lines with older technology 

have signals, and track warrants are only used on a few branches. 

Scheduling–The role of scheduling is important in European operations because the majority of 

the train service is passenger rail. Most passenger trains are scheduled a long time in advance, 

even months, as well as some freight trains. Freight trains, however, can be scheduled a few 

hours in advance. Every train must have a pre-determined train path that does not conflict with 

other trains. Due to the principle of open access, the train path is also the product that is sold by 

the infrastructure company to the train operating company. 

The time-distance traffic diagram of the stringline style is one of the most essential tools in 

European railroad operation. It is used not only as a scheduling document but also to control 

traffic in many ways, such as on dispatcher screens. A stringline diagram shows both the times 

and the locations of a train’s schedule. A scheduled trip is represented by a line, or string, that 

gives the location of each train at a given time. Crossing strings indicate where train paths will 

intersect. Some railroads use stringline diagrams with a horizontal station axis (e.g., Germany) 

while others prefer a vertical station axis. In advanced computer-based scheduling systems, for 
27

each block section, a blocking time is calculated and displayed around the stringline. The 

blocking time is the total elapsed time a section of track is exclusively allocated to a train. When 

coordinating train paths, the blocking times of different trains must never overlap each other. 

Traffic Control Principles–In traditional European operations, the dispatcher’s sole job is to 

regulate traffic. Local tower operators perform all safety-relevant work. The dispatcher gives 

assignments to local operators who control the interlocking when needed. The dispatcher uses a 

stringline styled train sheet to keep track of train movements. With the introduction of 

computer-based dispatching, the stringline sheet was computerized. The dispatcher is relieved of 

the drawing work and can concentrate on traffic management. These systems also provide a 

stringline-based foresight into the future, which gives the dispatcher a better view on upcoming 

conflicts. Beside the stringline screen, the dispatcher also has a screen with an electronic track 

chart. This track chart is a simplified version of the electronic track charts of the centralized 

traffic control (CTC) screens. 

As mentioned before, on most European lines, trains are governed by signal indication. A few of 

these lines are still controlled by towers of different types. A lot of lines are controlled by 

traditional CTC, such as from CTC offices or CTC towers. An increasing part of the network is 

controlled by control centers, which, step-by-step, replace traditional CTC in large areas. Only a 

very few branch lines are operated by written or verbal authority similar to TWC, either 

completely without signals or with a simplified signaling system as a safety overlay. 

The main characteristic of current development in traffic control is centralization. The area of a 

new control center is divided into control districts. Two kinds of dispatchers exist. The CTC 

operators have direct control of signals, routes, and switches. Each control district has a traffic 

controller who works with an electronic stringline diagram. Both the traffic controller’s and the 

CTC operator’s workstations are part of a timetable-based automatic route setting system. By 

moving train paths, the traffic controller can alter timetable data, which is used for automatic 

route setting. That relieves the CTC operators from most manual route setting. In Germany, 

currently seven operation control centers are under construction. In the final state, there will be 

75 control districts with about 400 control desks. The traffic controller’s desks are already in 

operation for the entire network. The CTC desks follow step-by-step with renewals of old 

interlocking and CTC systems. 

Influence of Open Access–In accordance with European Union law, the entire European rail 

network is now operated under open access. For this reason, the former railroads are now 

divided in infrastructure companies and train operating companies (TOCs). This splitting has 

changed dispatching significantly. The operation control centers belong to the infrastructure 

company. These control centers only perform train dispatching. For management of crews and 

equipment, the TOCs have their own control centers. In contrast to the operation control centers 

of the infrastructure companies, these control centers are called transportation control centers. In 

the scheduling process, the TOCs must order the required train paths (i.e., schedules) from the 

infrastructure company. The infrastructure company will then coordinate these train paths with 

the train paths of other TOCs and build the final timetable. In current operation, the train 

dispatcher of the operation control center will inform the transportation dispatcher of the TOC 

about incoming conflicts. The TOC dispatcher may suggest how to solve the conflict, but the 

final decision is always made by the train dispatcher of the infrastructure company. This 

principle ensures that only one authority person is always responsible for train control in the 

network. 
28

Qualification and Training of a European Dispatcher–Training for the job of dispatcher is more 

formalized than in North America as the career path is chosen after high school and 3 yr of 

schooling in the railroad trade school follows. During the first year of trade school, the 

fundamentals of railroad operation are taught. After this first year, the student chooses his/her 

field of interest and then begins specialization in the area of dispatching, train engineering, or 

yard service and industrial railroading. The third year involves OJT and finally licensing as a 

qualified professional. 

3.7 The Job of a Vessel Traffic Services Operator (Ed Wendlandt) 

The job of a Vessel Traffic Service operator shares many similarities with that of a railroad 

dispatcher. A Vessel Traffic Service operator helps to guide vessels in and out of busy ports 

within the United States. Similar to the cargo that are transported by rail, vessels carry oil, 

products, hazardous materials, and passengers from port to port everyday. 

Vessel traffic management uses several tools to manage traffic with minimal intervention to 

ensure the safe and efficient movement of vessels. VTS also manage conflicts with vessels in 

the water, such as converging traffic area. They are responsible for designing traffic separation 

schemes, which is essentially laying out safe distance between vessels during entry and departure 

routes that help with the flow in and out of ports. 

VTS also handles the navigation COLREG, which are the rules of the road for vessels in the 

water. VTS is the U.S. representative with the International Maritime Organization (IMO), as 

well as the International Association for Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities, which 

issues equipment carriage requirements for bridge-to-bridge radios and navigation equipment. 

VTS also conducts ports and waterway safety analysis (risk assessment) for ports that are having 

problems managing their vessel traffic. VTS will take responsibility for managing the port or 

will implement other measures, such as rules or regulations, in an effort to mitigate the port’s 

problems. 

VTS follows the IMO guidelines, which state that vessel management operations should be 

implemented by a competent authority and should assure safe and efficient vessel traffic 

management while protecting the surrounding environment. The service should also be able to 

interact with traffic and respond to developing traffic situations in the VTS area. 

History and Background–The U.S. Coast Guard implemented VTS in accordance with the Ports 

and Water Way Safety Act of 1972. Congress enacted this law following two collisions, one 

under the Golden Gate Bridge and one on Chesapeake Bay. 

Usually, VTS is the first responder following a collision. At this time VTS has three primary 

responsibilities: 

• Collect pertinent information. 

• Stabilize the scene (on-scene safety). 

• Notify responding agencies. 

They also deal with other unusual phenomenon, such as melting glaciers that create hazards to 

passing vessels. VTS has a new role in maritime domain awareness, staying alert for terrorist 

and other national security dangers. 
29

VTS has 10 major sites, including Houston, New York, Puget Sound, and Los Angeles. In some 

places, they manage vessels up to 12 mi off shore, especially in places like the HoustonGalveston area where there are many oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Puget Sound provides an interesting port complex with 3500 mi2

 of responsibility, some 

bordering Canada, requiring that VTS works jointly with the Canadian Coast Guard. Every year 

VTS manages the movement of billions of gallons of oil, large cruise ships, and the Alaskan 

Fishing Fleet and the U.S. Naval strategic port. The Washington State Ferry Service is also 

located in this area and transports 26 million passengers per year. The ferry service operates on a 

schedule and moves back and forth across the main traffic lanes. VTS monitors this complex 

area carefully. 

Responsibilities–The main responsibilities of VTS are to: 

• Ensure safe, efficient movement of vessels in a prescribed area by creating good order 

and predictability. 

• Communicate with vessels over the busy radio, which can be challenging. 

• Monitor vessel movements using sensor suite. 

• Respond to calls for assistance. This involves knowing the geography so that correct and 

helpful information can be given to those in distress or foreign vessels who are unfamiliar 

with U.S. waterways. 

• Collect, sort, and analyze information for future use to make recommendations or direct 

ship movements. 

• Provide clear, concise, accurate, timely, and purposeful information. Purposeful means 

tailoring the information to the situation. Weather, tides, and currents are all important if 

a squall is forming or fog is setting in. Operators should provide information, 

navigational assistance, and help with traffic organization. 

Training with Technology–Manual boards were the original tools used by VTS for traffic 

management. Each board represents a segment of waterway, and each card represents a vessel. 

The cards are placed in slots on boards to determine appropriate traffic organization. While 

manual boards work well for traffic management, they require much manipulation by the 

operator and require many hours to become proficient. Over the past 10 yr, technology has 

advanced to provide better computerized systems for VTS to use. Vessel Transit Management 

Systems use radar images on the integrated display system and have remote sensors, such as 

radar, VHF-FM radio, camera, automatic identification system, and trip line. They also use a 

physical oceanographic real-time system that provides real-time information on height of tides 

and current speed and direction. 

Operator training is both national and local. National VTS schools have state-of-the-art 

simulators to teach basic Vessel Traffic Management. These schools offer a certification course 

and are used to ensure that national policies are understood and carried forward in a standard 

manner. Local training provides the operator with an understanding on the local port complex 

and history, as well as an opportunity to become familiar with the equipment and regulations. 

Work Hours and Schedules–Work hours and schedules vary by location, but most common are: 

• 12 h on and 12 h off 
30

- 3 d on and 3 d off 

- Either all day or all night shifts 

- Shifts are from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. and 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. 

• 8 h sliding shifts 

• Within each shift, after 1 h on duty a break with rotation 

3.8 Dispatcher Taskload Assessment Tool (Stephen Reinach) 

As part of a contract with FRA, Foster-Miller, Inc. conducted research to develop a tool for 

assessing railroad dispatcher taskload. FRA previously developed a dispatcher taskload 

assessment method to identify desks that were overloaded or over-tasked. However, limitations 

to this particular assessment method existed because it was was railroad-specific, timeconsuming to collect data, and required numerous personnel. The goal of this project was to 

design a software tool to assist FRA Operating Practice inspectors and railroad officers from any 

railroad to quickly, easily, and unobtrusively assess railroad dispatcher taskload. 

Concept–The main idea for the assessment tool was to modify the taskload method developed by 

Office of Safety for their safety audit and make it widely applicable to railroads. To ensure 

utilization in the field, the design had to be quick, easy, and unobtrusive to implement. The tool 

itself needed to be able to: 

• Support future dispatcher research. 

• Support internal railroad dispatcher desk studies. 

• Ensure even distribution of taskload across desks. 

• Support FRA Office of Safety dispatch audits. 

Approach–The approach to designing the assessment tool consisted of two phases. In phase one 

the three main objectives were to 1) identify a comprehensive set of observable dispatcher tasks; 

2) discern factors that affect dispatcher taskload; and 3) determine how data can be collected, as 

well as the level of effort and difficulty required to collect taskload data. Phase two involved 

development of the actual taskload calculation methodology and converting that methodology 

into a portable software application suitable for use by railroad personnel in the field. Mr. 

Reinach’s presentation discussed results from the first phase. 

Taskload is defined as the average time demanded of a dispatcher in carrying out all job-related 

tasks at a particular desk, over a specified period of time (e.g., one shift). Time is the common 

denominator among all operations and allows for collection of data on different tasks at different 

railroads. 

Methods–First an initial set of dispatcher tasks were developed. Next was development and 

distribution of two rounds of questionnaires. These questionnaires expanded upon the initial 

tasks and identified suitable data collection methods. The questionnaires were distributed to 

representatives from all eight FRA regional offices, two railroads (one passenger/commuter and 

one freight) and the American Train Dispatchers Association. A total of 11 respondents 

completed the first questionnaire, and 10 of the 11 completed the followup questionnaire. 

Results–The initial set of dispatcher tasks were developed by conducting a literature review of 

dispatcher training materials; other documentation, interviews, and input from a subject matter 
31

expert; and naturalistic observation. From this set, the two questionnaires were developed and 

distributed. Based on data from the first questionnaire, a total of 67 dispatcher tasks were 

identified and organized into the following categories: 

• Actuation of signals, switches, blocking devices, and bridge controls via CTC/CAD 

• Issuance and cancellation of dispatcher-authorized mandatory directives 

• Granting of other track-related permissions, protections, and clearances (non-mandatory 

directives) 

• Carrying out non-movement authority or non-permission/protection/clearance 

communications 

• General recordkeeping tasks 

• Review of reference materials 

Respondents were asked about time and effort demands on certain tasks. The majority said that 

it took about the same amount of time to route passenger and local freight trains as it did to route 

a through freight train, but it took relatively more time to route work trains and high-rail 

vehicles. Respondents also said that it took relatively more effort to route local freight, work 

trains, and high-rail vehicles as compared to through freight trains. 

Respondents indicated which of the following data sources were applicable to the six categories 

of dispatcher tasks: 

• CAD report 

• Other computer report 

• Paper train sheet 

• Other paper record 

• Audio tape 

• Direct observation 

• Other 

• Cannot be collected 

CAD reports were identified most frequently as a source to collect data on CAD/CTC activity, 

mandatory directives, and general recordkeeping. Audio tape data was thought to be a good 

method for collecting data on track-related permissions, protections, and clearances. Direct 

observation was seen to be helpful with data from non-movement authority and nonpermission/protection/clearance communications, general recordkeeping, and review of 

reference material. 

Discussion–The research suggests that not all trains are created equal and that no one method is 

effective at collecting data on all six dispatcher task activities. Data on track-related 

permissions, protections, clearances; other communications; and general recordkeeping appear to 

be the most time-consuming, effortful, and obtrusive to collect. Over 50 percent of a 

dispatcher’s work-related time was estimated to be spent actuating signals and switches via 

CAD/CTC and issuing and canceling mandatory directives to track occupants. 
32

Previous research on dispatching combined with these results suggests that railroad dispatching 

is heavily cognitive in nature. Although this research helped to identify tasks and data collection 

methods, the relationship between observable taskload and unobservable cognitive workload is 

unknown. As a result, development of a taskload assessment tool based only on observable task 

activity may not be the most appropriate approach to characterizing railroad dispatching. 

Data on observable dispatcher tasks can serve as the building blocks to a preliminary model of 

dispatcher performance and safety that incorporates both the physical and cognitive aspects of a 

dispatcher’s job. This research led to a preliminary model of dispatcher performance. The 

model describes the four job functions that drive the job of a dispatcher, the cognitive aspects of 

the work, and the performance-shaping factors that affect dispatching performance. 

3.9 Understanding How Dispatchers Manage and Control Trains (Emilie Roth) 

The purpose of this research was to identify the sources of expertise or skills that dispatchers 

possess. This is important in terms of training and the introduction of new technology, which 

includes advanced train control systems, new display, and communications technology, such as 

Data Link, and high-speed trains. Understanding the required skill set is also important in terms 

of the hiring process for dispatchers. 

The methodology for this study was CTA. CTA provided the means to: 

• Examine how experienced dispatchers schedule trains and manage track use. 

• Identify cognitive activities that could be more effectively supported. 

• Identify features of the existing environment that contribute to effective performance and 

should be preserved in transition to new technologies. 

CTA involves observing people in the field as they do their job. The goal is twofold: 1) to try to 

understand what makes the set of tasks difficult and 2) to understand the skills and strategies that 

the job incumbents have developed to cope with problems. 

The study approach was an iterative bootstrap approach. Three researchers observed dispatchers 

for 4-h periods to get a sense of the nature of the dispatchers’ tasks and how they executed them. 

They also observed shift turnovers. A second set of followup observations were made at a 

second dispatch center, as well as at the original center. Researchers identified and documented 

sources of task complexity, skills, and strategies used by experienced dispatchers to cope with 

task demands and opportunities for performance improvement from training or the introduction 

of new technologies. The researchers looked for illustrative incidents and deviations from “the 

way it is supposed to be done.” 

Train dispatchers are responsible for: 

• Managing track use. 

• Insuring the safe and efficient routing of trains. 

• Insuring the safety of personnel working on and around the track. 

Dispatchers carry out these responsibilities as part of a distributed planning task that also 

involves dispatchers handling adjoining territories, locomotive engineers, and maintenance-ofway workers. 
33

Handling unpredictable situations makes the dispatcher’s job difficult. This involves 

dynamically re-computing train routes, meets, and passes. The dispatcher must also satisfy 

multiple, possibly conflicting, demands for track usage. High knowledge requirements and 

memory load, as well as heavy attention and communication demands, also make the job a 

difficult one. 

Examples of dispatcher decisions include the following: 

• Which train gets priority? 

• Is it possible to help a train make up time? 

• Is there adequate time to give track time to a maintenance-of-way crew? 

Dispatchers employ a variety of expert strategies to meet task demands. They use cheat sheets, 

desk files, and personal street maps to off-load memory requirements. Dispatchers continually 

anticipate and plan ahead. Specific strategies include: 

• Maintaining a big picture system, Big Picture using the wall display, other dispatchers, 

PC-based ticketing system, and radio communication 

• Planning cooperatively with dispatchers for other territories 

• Listening to radio communications 

• Contingency planning 

Dispatchers also employ expert strategies. These strategies are acting proactively and leveling 

their workload by taking action in anticipation of a need. 

The results of the CTA have implications in three areas: 

1) Advanced displays and decisions aids could provide more precise train location, 

facilitate access to information affecting train routing and track usage decisions, and 

provide train routing aids. 

2) Data Link technology would provide a means to off-load some radio channel 

communication. 

3) Training could be enhanced through the use of a dynamic simulator that provides a 

means to develop skills for handling challenging scenarios. 

3.10 Visualizing Railroad Operations: A Tool for Traffic Planners and Dispatchers 

(Mary Lee) 

The Volpe Center and Massachusetts Institute of Technology have been working on the 

development of this tool since 1996. The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, Guilford 

Rail, and Fulcrum Corporation, as well as two railroads, North Shore Railroad and the Paducah 

and Louisville Railway, participated in the tool’s design and development. The purpose of the 

project was to develop proof-of-concept software to demonstrate the potential benefits of this 

type of tool. An iterative user-centered approach was employed. The tool was initially 

developed for traffic planners, but it has potential use with dispatchers. 

Traffic planning requires complex decisionmaking and many tradeoffs. Similar to dispatchers, 

traffic planners must determine the operational sequence of future events. 
34

Stringline diagrams illustrate the times and locations of a scheduled trip. Railroads have 

employed them for over a century. The horizontal axis on a stringline diagram displays time 

and, on the vertical axis, the location. When a string is horizontal, the train is stopped. Where 

two strings cross, a meet and pass must occur. The slope of the line indicates direction and 

relative speed. A paper schedule shows just the stops while the string line shows the entire trip. 

The Railroad Traffic Planner Tool main window provides access to the string line. Supporting 

popup windows provide the means to enter trips and track restrictions. Settings files contain the 

track geography. Data can be output to an Excel file. A recent enhancement incorporates near 

real-time tracking using GPS data sent via cell phone. The GPS tracking function supplements 

existing data but is not intended for safety-critical applications. 

This tool could be incorporated into a dispatcher training program to help trainees learn to 

estimate future positions and how decisions can impact traffic flow across territories. The 

dispatcher’s preliminary planning and response to unexpected events could also benefit from the 

tool. 

The tool has the potential to provide safety and productivity benefits. It can help users compare 

different options, identify windows of opportunity, and set more realistic expectations for 

customers and other railroads. The tool developers are anxious for railroad feedback on its 

potential use for dispatchers. 

3.11 Panel Discussion: Future Challenges and Research Needs 

Representatives of the various stakeholder groups comprised this panel (see Figure 5). Panelists 

were asked to consider the following questions: 

• How will the introduction of new technology (e.g., positive train control (PTC), highspeed rail) impact your dispatching operation? 

• Will the decreasing cost of computer technology allow more widespread use of 

computer-based training? 

• What challenges do you face in hiring dispatchers, especially those who do not have 

railroad backgrounds? 

• If the position of dispatcher at your railroad has become a stepping stone to other 

positions at your railroad, how is this affecting your operation? 
35

Figure 5. Future Challenges Panel–Gary Lettengarver, Carl Barneyback, John Campbell, 

Leo McCann and Thomas Raslear, Moderator 

• Have joint dispatching operations been as effective or successful as anticipated? Are 

there specific challenges in joint operations? 

• How can FRA’s Human Factors Research program help the railroad industry in dealing 

with the above issues? 

Leo McCann, American Train Dispatchers Association 

Mr. McCann opened his remarks with the observation that, “The more things change, the more 

they stay the same.” He referred to the fact that dispatching centers began small but then moved 

to large centralized centers. The recent trend for dispatching centers is to move away from 

centralization to smaller settings or joint train dispatching. Each of these operating styles, 

however, presents different challenges. 

Mr. McCann questioned whether or not too much emphasis is placed on the testing of dispatcher 

candidates. He commented that perhaps the Long Island Railroad has the best system in which it 

gives a glossary of railroad terminology to the applicant to study and tests them on this. 

Another trend is to hire candidates who have college degrees, promising the college graduate 

promotions soon after employment. Mr. McCann questions if this practice is harming the 

dispatcher craft by not giving the promotions as advancements in the field by learning the 

position. Mr. McCann also advocates higher salaries for the position of dispatching. Inadequate 

pay and little investment in dispatching to make it a career within the industry may harm the 

craft. 

Another future challenge is identifying pools from which to draw dispatchers. Because the job 

of block operator has been eliminated, the two main resources are air traffic controllers and the 

military. 

Training is sometimes overlooked in the aging railroad. The next 10 yr will see significant 

changes in technology along with employee turnover. Before the dispatching community can 
36

look at the future, it needs to look at the past and see where dispatchers have come from and 

where the dispatcher craft needs to go. 

Current dispatching training practices began in 1970 when Congress passed the Federal Safety 

Act to ensure safe operations on railroads. Next, the Devoe Report in 19745

 defined the duties of 

a train dispatcher and described the tasks that dispatchers should be qualified to perform. Devoe 

defined the main categories as: 

• Prepare documentation. 

• Monitor/coordinate train movements. 

• Conduct preliminary planning. 

• Respond to unplanned events. 

• Respond to emergency events. 

• Initiate/stop train movements. 

Even though technology has changed over the last 30 yr, the core functions of a dispatcher have 

not. 

In the 1990s, an FRA assessment of railroad dispatcher training revealed a large variability 

among railroad training practices. A lack of consistent standards for measuring trainee 

competency existed. In addition, there was a dependence on informal and ill-structured OJT. 

Uneven practice on territory familiarity and a lack of refresher training were also common 

among the railroads. FRA believed that the combination of poor training methods and the 

addition of new trainees created a potential for reduced safety. 

In 1992, Congress required FRA to conduct a followup study on dispatcher training. In 1995, 

FRA reported its findings that included the following problem areas within OJT: 

• Inconsistent standards and policies for re-training 

• Lack of objectives and measurements 

• Lack of opportunity for supervisor training 

• Foregoing training because of personnel shortage 

• Lack of training opportunities for dispatchers to become familiar with the technology 

before having to use it in a real life situation 

Mr. McCann feels that these poor training methods, especially with regard to becoming familiar 

with new technology, will be a problem when positive train control (PTC) takes effect. 

Following the 1995 Report to Congress, FRA looked for recommendations with respect to 

minimum training standards, objectives, duration, methods, and frequency. FRA compiled these 

recommendations in a 1998 report, Training Requirements for Railroad Dispatchers: 

Objectives, Syllabi, and Test Design. This document provides fundamental objectives for train 

dispatcher training programs. 

 

5

 Devoe, D. (1974). An Analysis of the Job of Railroad Train Dispatcher. (Report No. FRA-ORD&D-74-37). 

Springfield, VA: National Technical Information Service. 
37

In 2003, FRA published a report on its findings designed to examine methods for evaluating and 

selecting railroad dispatcher candidates. FRA concluded that, as railroad dispatching technology 

continues to change, the knowledge, skills, and abilities of the dispatcher will also have to 

change. As seen with the advent of PTC, the job of actively dispatching trains will become one 

of passively monitoring a closed-loop system. Regardless of future changes and challenges to 

the job, Mr. McCann feels that this report contains valuable information that can be used in the 

selection of appropriately qualified candidates. 

Within the industry, formal training methods exist. The main problem occurs when trainees go 

through the OJT phase. Carriers rely heavily on this phase of training, yet no systematic 

guidelines for training consistency exist. Therefore, OJT tends to be unstructured and haphazard. 

With dispatchers taking on more and more responsibility, it is imperative to develop a 

standardized training program as a matter of safety, as well as a good business practice. 

John Campbell, CSX Transportation 

CSX’s primary challenge for the next 5 yr will be the introduction of new dispatching software 

for the entire CSX system. CSX began to update the company’s entire dispatching system. 

Currently CSX operates with two dispatching systems. One CAD system is used in Jacksonville, 

and a different one is in Albany and Indianapolis. Recent research showed that both systems 

have 1980s technology and needed to be updated to accommodate increasing traffic volume. 

Because there is a need to update these systems, a rolling 6-yr plan has been developed to 

convert the current CAD system into the next generation of dispatching software. The system 

that will be introduced consists of hardware that will: 

• Be updateable. 

• Be highly reliable. 

• Allow changes for railroad rules and operations. 

• Allow for PTC functionality. 

• Include full disaster recovery. 

• Be capable of dispatching from multiple locations. 

CSX’s 6-yr plan started in 2002 and will continue through 2007 with the hopes of the entire 

company using one system by 2005. The first phase has already been implemented in Chicago. 

The standalone system is open platform with new software functionality. The next phase will 

include deploying dispatcher authorities and messages into the integrated system. The train sheet 

phase will follow. A new communication system has already been implemented in Chicago and 

Jacksonville with Indiana and Albany scheduled to follow early in 2005. 

The new system will be point and click and possibly have touch-screen technology. Because this 

new system is physically different from the current system, testing the software and training the 

user are of utmost importance for system success. The training process will take place over the 

next 5 yr. As part of this testing and training process, current dispatchers have been brought 

from dispatching centers to be a part of the training team. These dispatchers have helped to 

develop the system and will be conducting the training of other dispatchers. Many tools are 

available for the railroads to incorporate into their systems; however, successful use of these 
38

tools lies in proper training of the dispatcher. As technology is rapidly changing and improving, 

it is important to keep up with user training for both efficiency and safety. 

For CSX, which operates in areas prone to disastrous weather events, having a weather-update 

interface program is highly desirable. The new system will have a weather tracker using GPS 

satellite, as well as an integrative planner. A disaster recovery plan is also very important to test 

and have in place so that the dispatcher is prepared before disastrous events occur. 

CSX has been very successful in implementing the first phase of the technology change-over 

plan that was implemented in Chicago. It hopes to be successful with the future phases over the 

next few years. The introduction of this new technology will not change the number of 

dispatchers at CSX’s dispatching centers. 

Carl Barneyback, Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad (IHB) 

IHB shares a dispatching center with CSX in Chicago. Trends may lead to more joint facilities, 

but some concerns and issues to consider also exist. Mr. Barneyback is a part of this joint effort 

in Chicago. He offered some advice when considering starting a joint operation. 

The first question to ask is, “What is the motivation for a join operation?” For CSX and IHB, it 

was a natural fit because it was easy to share track and divert traffic to each other’s rails in order 

to keep the terminal fluid. If the two companies do a lot of business with each other and 

communication problems or hand off problems occur, then joining the two companies might 

benefit both companies. The owners must make sure that the employees buy into the concept 

and that everyone will benefit from dispatching within the same operation. The company must 

make sure that this is good for them and not strictly look at what benefits other companies had 

from joint operations. 

The next point to consider is the corporate culture and history between the two companies. 

Employees do not want to sit in the same room with people that they have been trained to dislike 

because they are from a rival railroad. The management has to understand the impact of the 

merger on the employees working together. 

CSX and IHB were old rivals. When they joined operations, however, many new dispatchers 

were hired who had not been a part of the rivalry. This helped to make the merger more 

peaceful. 

The two companies joining must also consider the size of each railroad and the cultural 

differences. Is the working climate similar or very different? Agendas, motivations, and even 

requirements for service deliveries must be considered. Before joining, the two companies must 

consider if there is more to be gained than conflicts in climate and schedules. They must be 

willing to run the operation equally and not allow size imbalances affect the way the dispatching 

occurs. 

Another aspect to consider is differences in operating practices between the railroads. Vast 

differences could exist in the rules system in place at each railroad. The hardware and 

dispatching software could also be different. Data processing systems should be considered. At 

least one of the railroads should have a capable Information Technology department to help 

bridge any software gaps. In general, the railroads need to have people on staff who are capable 

of coordinating the merger. 
39

In addition, one must determine if the facility is capable of handling the computer processing 

needs for one large dispatching center. The building should be wired for the appropriate amount 

of computer and phone lines. The physical location is very important and should be on neutral 

ground where neither party has to go to the other company’s location to work. 

A problem can arise if the two companies have different pay rates among the employees. 

Adjustments should be made so that all employees are earning at the same rate. Working side by 

side with people on higher pay scales can cause strain among the employees. 

Another consideration is perhaps to consolidate the work force to doing all the jobs. Joint 

operations function successfully without consolidation of the work force, but it is a possibility to 

consider. The management would be training employees to work all the different jobs within the 

one dispatching center instead of treating the center like two operations. Perhaps combining the 

work force and cross training them is the new joint dispatching center of the future. 

One last consideration is for management not to assume that putting people together from 

different companies is going to work without any hitches. Some issues will need to be worked 

through to make the operations work smoothly. No one answer can cover every joint operation. 

Each company must decide for itself what will work best for the two parties involved. 

Mr. Barneyback concluded his talk by emphasizing the need to conduct research on reducing 

dispatcher stress. There is a strong need to learn about ways to make the job less stressful. 

Research should focus on why dispatchers are stressed and how to reduce the factors that 

contribute to the stress on dispatchers. He sees a need to learn about both the physical and 

mental factors that lead to occupational stress on dispatchers. 

Gary Lettengarver, Metrolink 

Mr. Lettengarver believes that adequate dispatcher training will continue to challenge the 

railroad industry. The industry must move toward standardized training, particularly those 

railroads that do not hire a sufficient number of dispatchers to conduct their own classroombased training. From experience Metrolink found that a dispatcher cannot be adequately trained 

solely through OJT. Metrolink sends all of its new hire dispatchers to the Terrant County 

Community College program which BNSF helped to establish. After completing this program, 

Metrolink dispatcher trainees return to Metrolink for territory training. Mr. Lettengarver 

encouraged the workshop participants to consider sending their trainees to this program. 

All Metrolink dispatchers have 2 wk of refresher training annually. One wk is classroom 

training, and the other is field training. Field training involves spending time with a track gang 

and a switchman, as well as riding the territory that the dispatcher covers. During the classroom 

portion, 2 d are spent on rules and 3 d on procedures. Mr. Lettengarver reported that during the 

classroom session the dispatchers share their experiences and effectively “take over the class.” 

Before implementing this type of refresher training, dispatchers averaged 70 to 80 procedural 

errors annually. Now they average less than 10 per yr. 

Coaching is also an important part of the Metrolink training program. Mr. Lettengarver and his 

chiefs have been trained to work with the Metrolink dispatchers to improve their skills. This 

type of training has also contributed to the improvement in efficiency ratings. 

41

4. Attendee Feedback 

A total of 33 (52 percent) of the 63 workshop attendees completed the Workshop Evaluation 

form. This section summarizes the feedback obtained through this process. 

Attendees rated four overall aspects of the workshop. A majority of the attendees assigned a 

rating of excellent or very good for all four aspects of the meeting. Table 1 summarizes these 

ratings. These ratings indicate that the attendees found the content, organization, and utility of 

the information of exceptionally high quality and value. 

Table 1. Summary of Attendee Ratings 

Aspect Excellent 

Very 

Good Good Fair Poor 

Overall workshop 

organization 

18 14 1 

Workshop content and 

discussions 

12 13 5 3 

Workshop facility and 

location 

21 10 2 

Usefulness of the information 

presented 

7 18 6 1 1 

Responses to the question, “What part of the workshop had the most value? Why?” included the 

following: 

• The selection panel appeared to be the most valuable. Ten respondents felt this topic was 

particularly relevant, and it was beneficial to hear from others on their 

problems/approaches. Not everyone, however, agreed with panelist approaches. 

• Six respondents liked the panel session format because it enabled an efficient way to 

provide a cross section of ideas on a topic. 

• Four respondents noted that they enjoyed hearing about German dispatch operations. 

• Four found the presentation on dispatcher workload, stress, and fatigue most valuable. 

• More generally, many respondents liked the exposure to different viewpoints and 

practices. This enabled benchmarking and generation of new ideas. 

• Three respondents noted that the social hour the evening before was valuable in allowing 

one-on-one conversation with others and that the entire workshop was a great way to 

network within the dispatching field. 
42

Individual comments included the following: 

• “The recognition of the difficulties of the train dispatcher’s job and the need to continue 

to find ways to address those difficulties. Complicated concepts and analyses were 

presented in easily understandable terms.” 

• “Each topic was very well organized and presented which made this program interesting 

and valuable.” 

• “German Transportation System–gave perspective on what we could do/have if we 

wanted more efficiencies.” 

• “Mr. Pachl’s presentation at lunch was excellent for comparison with our operations.” 

• “Panel discussions [were] good for benchmarking and generating ideas.” 

• “Panel discussions [were a] time-effective way of presenting several different 

perspectives on a common topic.” 

• “It was all good.” 

Attendees were also asked “What part had the least value? Why?” Two attendees commented 

that they would have liked to have more emphasis on the next steps with regard to implementing 

the results of the various research studies. Three attendees felt that one of the presentations 

covered the duties and decisionmaking process of a dispatcher at a level of detail that was below 

the understanding level of most of the audience. 

The final question on the evaluation form was, “What can FRA do to improve future 

workshops?” Responses fell into three categories: changes to the workshop process, suggestions 

for future workshop topics, and suggestions for FRA Office of Research and Development. 

Workshop Process Suggestions 

• Expand the number of days to cover the agenda, or reduce the agenda, to enable 

participants to explore topics more thoroughly. 

• Hold these workshops more frequently (e.g., once a year). Rotate topics yearly (e.g., 

focus on whatever is a “hot” topic that year). 

• More participation by working dispatchers as speakers and panelists. 

• Include breakout groups to facilitate discussion of ideas among attendees. Facilitate 

information exchange. 

• Announce meeting details further in advance to aid organizations to fiscally plan for 

meeting. 

• Advertise meetings to railroad HR departments. 

• More involvement [in audience] by short lines. Also make sure conference 

announcement is put out to short lines more effectively. 

• Include more presentations from those outside the industry but who perform jobs similar 

to dispatching (e.g., air traffic control, 911 dispatchers). 

• Invite industry to submit topics for workshops. 
43

• Pose specific questions to the audience. 

• More breaks and opportunities to network and meet people. 

Workshop Topic Suggestions 

• Examine existing regulations, including Hours of Service, to determine what is outdated 

and what needs to be updated. 

• Identify solutions (e.g., stress management), not just research problems. Focus on taking 

research results and implementing in the industry. 

• “Have a panel of train dispatchers discuss their jobs and how they workplace could be 

made safer and more efficient, why they chose the job and what can be done to make the 

job more attractive to new hire or transfers.” 

• Presentation on how FRA Office of Safety conducts its dispatcher assessments. 

• Facilitated session on planning dispatcher research/research needs (rather than an open 

panel session). 

Office of Research and Development Suggestions 

• Develop a dispatcher simulator, (e.g., to aid training). 

• Set standards for radio communications. 

• Add dispatcher-related information to FRA Web site on ongoing basis. 

• Develop a trade school for dispatchers, as well as train and engine crafts, based on the 

German model presented by Joern Pachl. This could be a public/private partnership. 

45

5. Important Issues 

Comments from workshop participants in response to individual research presentations and 

panelist remarks suggest that the following are areas where issues exist and additional research 

efforts may be needed: 

• Recruitment and Selection of Dispatcher Candidates–Participants at the 1998 dispatcher 

workshop unanimously agreed that they needed help with selection criteria and methods for 

recruiting dispatchers. Participants at the 2004 meeting voiced the same concerns. FRA 

sponsored a research project on this subject in response to industry concerns voiced at the 

1998 workshop; however, many workshop participants were not aware of the report. As a 

result of the workshop, participants said that they will incorporate the study’s 

recommendations into their dispatcher recruitment and selection process. 

• Retention of Dispatchers–Closely related to the issue of recruitment and selection is the issue 

of retention of dispatchers. Training of dispatchers can cost in excess of $50,000 per trainee, 

and it may take several years before a dispatcher is fully proficient and capable of mentoring 

trainees. High turnover among dispatchers has economic, as well as operational, 

consequences for the railroad. Numerous workshop participants expressed a desire to find 

new ways to boost retention of their dispatchers. 

• Critical Incident Skills Training–An important element of the dispatcher’s job is to respond 

to emergency events. While this is a rare occurrence, the dispatcher must have the skills to 

handle these situations when they arise. Workshop participants sought guidance on methods 

for identifying individuals who are able to handle emergencies, as well as ways to train 

dispatchers to handle critical incidents. 

• Impact of PTC–In recent years PTC has been implemented through a number of FRAsponsored demonstration programs. PTC will change how the dispatcher manages and 

communicates with track occupants. Issues related to the impact of this change on the job of 

the dispatcher remain to be explored. 

• Integration of New Technology–Continuing technological advances have the potential to 

facilitate the tasks of the dispatcher. For example, train position information obtained 

through GPS may aid in managing trains and other track users in dark territory. As a second 

example, commercial sources of weather data are available and may provide information to 

help the dispatcher in planning future train movements. The most efficient integration of the 

information from these two sources, as well as other new technologies into the dispatcher’s 

workstation has not been explored. 

• Dispatcher as Team Member–The functions and cognitive aspects of the dispatcher’s job are 

well-documented and understood. The interaction and decisionmaking process of the 

dispatcher with the chief dispatcher and other dispatchers, however, is not as wellunderstood. Team cognitive task analysis provides a methodology for understanding the 

dispatcher’s role in this railroad team. 

• Dispatcher Work Schedules and Sleep Patterns–Staffing shortages at some dispatching 

centers result in significant overtime for the dispatchers, leading to increased stress levels. 

FRA-sponsored study of dispatcher workload, stress, and fatigue collected data from 
46

dispatchers at two dispatching centers. While this study provided a preliminary assessment 

of these issues, there is need for a more complete picture of work patterns and fatigue for this 

craft. A more complete characterization of of dispatcher work patterns and fatigue will help 

determine if alternatives to current dispatcher staffing and scheduling practices are needed. 

• Stress Reduction Techniques–FRA-sponsored study of dispatcher workload, stress, and 

fatigue documented occupational stress among dispatchers. Participants suggested that there 

should now be a focus on identifying appropriate stress reduction techniques. 

• Joint Dispatching Operations–In the 1980s, railroads moved to centralized dispatching 

operations with one center controlling trains for the entire railroad. The next decade saw a 

move back to regional dispatching centers. The trend now is to supplement these with joint 

operations where dispatchers from two different railroads sit side-by-side in one facility to 

dispatch trains in a specific geographic region. The benefits and shortcomings of this 

arrangement are uncertain at this time but should be determined and documented. 
47

6. Recommendations 

The experiences of this workshop and the feedback from participants led to two 

recommendations. One recommendation concerns future events of this nature, and the other 

concerns the content of a dispatcher research program. 

Future Workshops 

The workshop achieved the goals as presented in Section 1.2. Workshop participants especially 

liked the opportunity to share best practices and to learn about other dispatching operations. 

Future events of this type should include more industry representatives and working dispatchers 

and be expanded to 11⁄2 d to allow adequate time for additional interactive sessions. The current 

workshop covered FRA-sponsored research that took place over a period of 6 yr. No current 

dispatcher research projects are underway so it is unlikely that there will be enough research 

projects to support another workshop like this one for several years. An event that combines 

research with discussion of operational issues and jointly sponsored by both FRA Office of 

Research and Development and the Office of Safety, however, might be feasible. 

FRA’s Human Factors Research and Development Program sponsors research on many aspects 

of railroad operations. The success of this event can serve as a prototype for a way to 

disseminate research results and obtain stakeholder input on other aspects of the human factors 

research program. Establishing a periodic FRA Human Factors Research and Development 

workshop would assure that stakeholders have an opportunity to learn firsthand from FRAsponsored research and to provide input to the FRA’s human factors research program. This 

program of periodic workshops should be accompanied by a systematic evaluation methodology 

to enable FRA to gauge the success of both its research program and the individual events. 

Dispatcher Research 

To date FRA Human Factors Research and Development Program has sponsored a number of 

research studies that concern railroad dispatching. Issues raised at the workshop suggest the 

following new research programs: 

• Interactive Dispatching Simulator–The development of an interactive dispatching 

simulator would address several of the issues raised by workshop participants. Current 

dispatching simulators are simply a replica of the CAD workstation in the dispatching 

center and are designed for training dispatchers on the mechanics of operating the system. 

An interactive simulator would provide a means for the dispatcher to communicate and 

interact with the train crew, maintenance-of-way crews, the chief dispatcher, and other 

dispatchers on adjoining territories. It could be used for activities, such as critical 

incident skills training, examining the impact of PTC, and evaluating new technologies. 

• Retention Strategies–A study of best practices for encouraging retention of dispatchers, 

similar to what was done with regard to selection, would provide valuable information to 

railroad management and labor. Railroads of various types and sizes could be contacted 

to document their experiences. The experience of other industries where retention has 

been a problem (e.g., nursing) could also be reviewed. Materials for use by railroads 

could also be prepared. These materials may include a brochure describing the job of a 
48

dispatcher and the importance of this job to the railroad, and possibly a short videotape 

with testimonials from working dispatchers. 

• Team CTA–As follow-on to the CTA described at the meeting, a team CTA would 

explore the dispatcher’s interactions with the chief and other dispatchers and their group 

decisionmaking processes. A clearer understanding of decisions that involve multiple 

players can have implications for training, design of workstations displays, and 

organizational structure. 

• Work Schedules and Sleep Patterns–A survey of working dispatchers can provide data on 

their work schedules and sleep patterns, as well as the demographics of the work force. 

At least 2 wk of data should be collected from a random sample of actively working 

dispatchers. This type of data will provide a profile of the typical work schedule and 

sleep pattern of U.S. dispatchers. From this data it will be possible to identify work 

patterns that may lead to excessive fatigue and job stress. 

• Stress Reduction Strategies–The survey described above can include inquiring about 

sources of workplace stress. Once the sources of stress are identified, specific strategies 

can be developed or adopted from other environments. 

• Critical Incident Skills Training–The objective of this project would be to develop a set 

of training materials designed for both initial and refresher training. A survey of 

dispatching supervisors could identify situations that their dispatchers have faced. Based 

on these actual cases histories, role playing exercises could be developed. The exercises 

would be pilot tested with working dispatchers before finalizing the training materials. 
49

Appendix A. 

Workshop Agenda 

8:30 a.m. Welcome 

- Grady Cothen, FRA 

Goals for the Day 

- Michael Coplen, FRA 

8:45 a.m. Selection of Dispatcher Candidates 

- Judith Gertler, Foster-Miller, Inc. 

9:15 a.m. Panel Discussion: Development of a Dispatcher Selection Program 

- Frank Ferrara, Metro-North Railroad 

- Jayan Sen, Burlington-Northern Railway 

- Jo Lynne Lehan, Union Pacific Railroad 

- Ron Vincent, Portland & Western Railroad, a Genesee & Wyoming Company 

Moderated by Judith Gertler, Foster-Miller, Inc. 

10:00 a.m. Break 

10:30 a.m. Dispatcher Workload, Stress and Fatigue 

- Stephen Popkin, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

11:00 a.m. Fatigue Management Behaviors: Effects of Feedback from Performance Actigraphs 

- Patrick Sherry, University of Denver

11:30 a.m. The 21st Century Short Line Dispatching Center 

- Thomas Murphy, American Rail Dispatching Center

12:00 p.m. Lunch 

European Dispatching Operations 

- Joern Pachl 

1:30 p.m. The Job of a Vessel Traffic Services Operator 

- Ed Wendlandt, U.S. Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Services 

2:00 p.m. Dispatcher Taskload Assessment Tool 

- Stephen Reinach, Foster-Miller, Inc.

2:30 p.m. Understanding How Dispatchers Manage and Control Trains 

- Emilie Roth, Roth Cognitive Engineering 

3:00 p.m. Break 

3:15 p.m. Visualizing Railroad Operations: A Tool for Traffic Planners and Dispatchers 

- Mary Lee, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 

3:45 p.m. Panel Discussion: Future Challenges and Research Needs 

- Leo McCann, American Train Dispatchers Association 

- John Campbell, CSX Transportation 

- Carl Barneyback, Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad 

- Gary Lettengarver, Metrolink 

Moderated by Thomas Raslear, FRA 

4:45 p.m. Adjourn 

- Michael Coplen 

51

Appendix B. 

List of Attendees 

Name Title Organization 

Sarah Acton Project Engineer Foster-Miller, Inc. 

Jay Anderson Project Engineer Union Switch & Signal, Inc. 

Paul Ayers Trustee American Train Dispatchers Department 

Sterling R. Barker Director, Dispatcher 

Scheduling/Productivity 

BNSF Railway Company 

Carl Barneyback Manager Train Operations Indian Harbor Belt Railroad 

Dan E. Bodeman General Director, Rules/Field Support BNSF Railway Company 

Crawford Boggs Trustee American Train Dispatchers Department 

Theodore Bundy Technical Training Manager Federal Railroad Administration 

John Campbell Director Network Operations CSX Transportation 

Raymond Ciarlo Superintendent Dispatching Center Amtrak 

Michael Coplen Human Factors Program Manager Federal Railroad Administration 

Grady Cothen, Jr. Acting Associate Administrator for 

Safety 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Rich Detar Project Engineer Union Switch & Signal, Inc. 

Terry Doyle Operating Practices Training Federal Railroad Administration 

Ralph Elston Fatigue Countermeasures Coordinator Federal Railroad Administration 

Cary E. Emmons General Chairman -CSXT-East ATDA CSXT/ATDA 

Frank Ferrara Superintendent - Train Ops MTA Metro-North Railroad 

Rick Gallant Senior Transportation Supervisor CA Public Utilities Comm. 

Judith Gertler Division Manager Foster-Miller, Inc. 

Larry Graham Chief Dispatcher Metrolink (SCRRA) 

S.A. Hunnicutt Vice President American Train Dispatchers Department 

Albert S. Kaye Project Coordinator Federal Railroad Administration 

Sam Kimbro Nashville & Eastern Railroad Corp 

Daniel Knepper Sr. Vice President Digital Concepts, Inc. 

Mary Lee Engineering Psychologist U.S. Dept of Transportation, Volpe Center 

Jo Lynne Lehan General Director Operations Support Union Pacific Railroad 

Brenda Lettengarver Manager Operating Rules Amtrak-Southwest DUN 

Gary Lettengarver Superintendent of Dispatching Metrolink 

F. Leo McCann Secretary/Treasurer American Train Dispatchers Department 

Susan McDonough Program Administrator Foster-Miller, Inc. 

Gary L. Melton Secretary/Treasurer American Train Dispatchers Department 

Jeffrey F Moller Executive Director Operations Association of American Railroads 

Jordan Multer Manager, Rail Human Factors Program U.S. Dept of Transportation, Volpe Center 

Tom Murphy Manager, American Rail Dispatching 

Center 

RailAmerica 

Joern Pachl Professor, Railway Engineering Technical University of Braunschweig 

Gregory Pardlo VP American Train Dispatcher's Association 

Richard Pennisi OP Inspector Federal Railroad Administration 

Steve Popkin Human Factors Research Psychologist Volpe National Trans. Systems Center 

Thomas Raslear Senior Human Factors Program Manager Federal Railroad Administration 

Stephen Reinach Senior Engineer Foster-Miller, Inc. 

John L Reininger Director Dispatching Services Union Pacific Railroad 

Ron Robusto Amtrak 
52

Name Title Organization 

Dale Roddy President Digital Concepts, Inc. 

Howard Rosen Principal Rosen Consulting 

Emilie Roth Roth Cognitive Engineering 

Jayan Sen Director Human Resources and Medical Burlington Northern Santa Fe 

Irene Shapiro Manager, Human Resouces Southern California Regional Rail Authority 

Patrick Sherry University of Denver Transportation Institute 

A.M. Snyder Vice President American Train Dispatchers Department 

Michael Steffen Senior Manager Operations Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway 

Jon Stuart Sr. Human Performance Investigator Transportation Safety Board of Canada 

Marci Valdivieso Vice President of Sales Engineering RailComm, Inc. 

Ron Vincent Vice President Portland & Western Railroad 

David W. Volz Vice President American Train Dispatchers Department 

Craig Wade Vice President/General Mgr. Nashville & Eastern Railroad Corp 

G.S. Wasserman Trustee American Train Dispatchers Department 

Scott Weaver Director Labor Relations Norfolk Southern Corp. 

Gerald Weeks Chief, Human Performance & Survival 

Factors Div. 

National Transporation Safety Board 

Ed Wendlandt Commandant (G-MWV) U.S. Coast Guard 

Thomas A. White Senior Operations Specialist Transit Safety Management 

Michael S. Wolly General Counsel - ATDA Zwerdling, Paul, Kahn & Wolly, PC 

Daniel Yerina Sr. Project Manager Union Switch & Signal, Inc. 
53

Appendix C. 

Participant Biographies 

Grady Cothen is the acting FRA Associate Administrator for Safety. Grady has served with 

FRA since 1973 in various legal and program positions. 

In his current “Acting” role, Grady is responsible for executive direction of the railroad safety 

program nationwide. He also retains responsibility for management of agency teams 

participating in working groups of the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee. Over his years at 

FRA, Grady has been pivotally involved in development of the alcohol and drug regulations, 

tank car crashworthiness requirements, Passenger Equipment Safety Standards, FRA’s highwayrail crossing program, and many other safety initiatives. 

Grady is a member of the District of Columbia bar and a 1975 graduate of the Georgetown 

University Law Center. He received his undergraduate degree from Oklahoma Baptist 

University in 1968, and served in the United States Army during 1969-70. 

Michael Coplen is a Human Factors Program Manager for FRA’s Office of Research and 

Development, and co-manages (along with Tom Raslear) FRA’s Human Factors Program. He 

worked in the railroad industry first as a brakeman and conductor, and then for several years as a 

locomotive engineer. He holds a Master’s degree in Management and Organizational Behavior 

from the University of Nebraska, and has completed extensive post-master’s coursework toward 

a Ph.D. in Human Factors at the University of Connecticut. He holds professional memberships 

in the Association of Professional Sleep Societies and the American Evaluation Association, and 

is credited with several scientific publications in areas such as on-call work/rest schedules, 

cognitive task analyses, and visual displays. Mr. Coplen also sits on a variety of government and 

industry committees and working groups, including the North American Rail Alertness 

Partnership and the NIH Sleep Research Disorders Advisory Board. He is currently the CoChair of Operator Fatigue Management (OFM) Initiative through the DOT’s Human Factors 

Coordinating Committee. 

Judith Gertler has over 20 yr of transportation-related experience. Currently she manages the 

Human Performance and Operations Research Division at Foster-Miller. Since joining FosterMiller in 1995 she has been involved in human factors research on a variety of railroad 

operational issues including training, worker stress and fatigue, and yard worker safety. She is 

currently managing a study of work schedules and sleep patterns of signalmen and maintenance 

of way employees. Earlier in her career she worked at the Volpe National Transportation 

Systems Center where she was involved with the early planning for improved rail service in the 

Northeast Corridor and grade crossing safety. She holds both a B.S. and M.S. from Carnegie 

Mellon University. 

Frank Ferrara is the Deputy Chief Operations Services for Metro-North’s Operations Control 

Center. He started his railroad career in 1974 as a telegrapher/leverman with Penn Central, 

Metro-North’s predecessor railroad. Frank was promoted to train dispatcher in 1979 and chief 

dispatcher in 1989. In July 1993 he was promoted to Superintendent of Train Operations and in 

2000 he was promoted to his current position which includes responsibility for all aspects of 

Metro-North’s Control Center Operations. 
54

Jayan Sen began his career with the BNSF in 1998. Since December 2003 he has been the 

Director Human Resources for BNSF’s Powder River Division. He has been involved with all 

aspects of recruiting, testing, interviewing and selection as well as performance assessment. 

Jayan has also trained recruiters how to conduct behavioral structured interviews. Prior to 

joining the BNSF, he was a test and selection specialist for the Ball Foundation. While working 

at the BNSF Jayan has been completing the requirements for a Ph.D. in industrial-organizational 

psychology and he hopes to finish that process this coming December. 

Jo Lynne Lehan hired out in 1977 off the former Missouri Pacific Railroad as an operator. She 

started dispatching trains in 1981 in Houston, Spring and Little Rock. In 1988 she became part 

of the implementation team to convert all the dispatching offices to the Computer Aided 

Dispatching system. Jo Lynne became a director in 1981 working the Southern, Central and 

Northern Regions at the Harriman Dispatch Center. While a director she was involved in the 

mergers with CNW and SP. In 1999 Jo Lynne became a Director of Network Operations leading 

the Service Restoration Process and QSP202 Curfew Process. This past February she was 

promoted to General Director Operations Support at the Harriman Dispatch Center. 

Ron Vincent is the Vice-President for Customer Service/Marketing and Sales at the Portland & 

Western, which is a Genesee & Wyoming Company. In this position he is responsible for 

managing, designing and scheduling operational plans, including train movements. He began his 

career with the Portland & Western in 1997. Previously he held positions with the UP, the SP 

and the Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroads. Although the Portland & Western is part of a 

larger holding company, they manage their operation as if they were an autonomous short line 

railroad. 

Stephen Popkin has been researching the effects of shiftwork and fatigue for the past 15 yr. 

Studying under Dr. Donald Tepas at the University of Connecticut, and at the Finnish Institute of 

Occupational Health, Steve focused his doctoral research efforts on the health and performance 

effects of irregularly scheduled locomotive engineers in the U.S. rail freight industry. He has 

spent the past several years studying the effects of fatigue and potential countermeasures for 

various transportation modes, including rail passenger and freight operations, commercial 

trucking, and pipeline dispatching. In addition, he co-chairs the DOT Human Factors 

Coordinating Committee’s Operator Fatigue Management team. This team is responsible for 

overseeing the development of fatigue mitigating tools and disseminating information on fatiguerelated initiatives and findings to the transportation enterprise. 

Pat Sherry is a researcher at the University of Denver. Since receiving his doctorate from the 

University of Iowa in 1981, Pat has been involved in studies of fatigue, job stress, occupational 

safety, and human factors associated with job performance. His research projects have included 

railroad train dispatchers and job stress, a project that has been expanded to include the trucking 

industry. 

Most recently, Pat has been involved in assessing and designing fatigue countermeasure 

programs for the railroad industry. Pat has conducted numerous studies and seminars for 

railroad personnel. He was responsible for developing the Dispatcher Aptitude Test that the 

Burlington Northern Santa Fe, Southern Pacific, Denver Rio Grande, and Montana Rail Link use 

in selecting dispatchers. In the early 90’s he conducted a system wide training program in 

behavioral based safety for the BNSF. He is currently engaged in a project designed to 

determine the training and educational needs of transportation personnel for the next decade. 
55

Tom Murphy is Director of the American Rail Dispatching Center which is located in 

St. Albans, VT. The ARDC was incorporated this past January and is a wholly-owned 

subsidiary of RailAmerica. 

Tom began his affiliation with RailAmerica as a RAILTEX employee in 1998 where he filled a 

position as a train dispatcher for the New England Central Railroad (NECR). In 2000 he was 

promoted to Chief Dispatcher at the NECR, and was responsible for consolidating RailAmerica’s 

Atlantic Region railroads into one center. Last January Tom was promoted to the Director of 

ARDC, where he is now responsible for the Center's daily operation, marketing, financial 

reporting and future growth. Prior to his employment with RailAmerica, Tom was a qualified 

dispatcher for the New York and Susquehanna Railroad in Cooperstown, NY. Tom holds an 

honors degree from the State University of New York at Brockport. 

Since 1996 Joern Pachl has held the position of Professor of Railway Systems Engineering at 

the Braunschweig Technical University. From 1982 to 1984 he was a block operator and 

assistant train director at German Railways. In 1984 he began his study of transportation 

engineering. After receiving his degree he became a project manager for German Railways. He 

subsequently completed the requirements for a doctorate in engineering and began his teaching 

career. He is the author of several textbooks on railway operation, including one in English, 

Railway Operation and Control. 

Commander Ed Wendlandt assumed the duties of Chief of the U.S. Coast Guard Vessel 

Traffic Services program in July 2002. Prior to his current assignment, he served as the 

Technical Director for the Coast Guard’s Fleet Logistics System Project that developed the first 

enterprise-wide system, to automate the Coast Guard’s Logistic cycle. From 1995 to 1998 Ed 

served as Executive Officer, Vessel Traffic Service Houston/Galveston, where he transformed its 

operations from a manual board to a state-of-the-market Vessel Traffic Management System. 

Ed began his Coast Guard career as a deck watch officer and operations officer aboard a Coast 

Guard cutter. Following that assignment, he served as Commanding Officer of the cutter POINT 

ROBERTS, a patrol boat based in Mayport, FL where he conducted numerous Search and 

Rescue and Maritime Law Enforcement operations. He graduated from the U.S. Coast Guard 

Academy in 1985 and later earned an M.S. in Computer Sciences from the University of Central 

Florida. 

Stephen Reinach is a Senior Engineer with Foster-Miller, where he has been studying railroad 

operations safety issues for the past 8 yr. He has supported or taken the lead on several research 

studies that have focused on railroad dispatchers, including the development of a set of 

recommended railroad dispatcher training objectives and model syllabi for the railroad industry, 

and the first railroad dispatcher workshop held in 1998. Most recently Stephen has been 

studying safety issues related to remote control locomotive operations, and has been working on 

developing a root cause analysis methodology that can be used by the railroad industry to learn 

more about the human factors contributions to train accidents and injuries. Stephen earned a 

B.S., Psychology at the University of Michigan and an M.S., Industrial Engineering at the 

University of Iowa. 

Emilie Roth is a cognitive psychologist whose work has involved analysis of human problemsolving and decision-making in real-world environments, and the impact of support systems on 

performance. 
56

For the past 5 yr, Emilie has been actively involved in performing cognitive task analyses of 

railroad dispatchers, locomotive engineers and roadway workers. Most recently she has been 

participating in a comprehensive study examining the potential impact of a new train control 

system on human performance and human error of train crews, roadway workers, dispatchers 

and mechanical maintenance personnel. 

Since 1997 Emilie has operated her own company, Roth Cognitive Engineering. Prior to that she 

worked at the Westinghouse Science and Technology Center where she pioneered the application 

of cognitive work analysis methods and advanced visualization and representational aiding 

concepts to the design of first-of-a-kind systems. She received her Ph.D. in Cognitive 

Psychology from the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana. 

Mary Townsend Lee is an Engineering Psychologist at the Volpe National Transportation 

Systems Center. She began working at the Volpe Center as a co-op student while earning her 

undergraduate degree in Engineering Psychology from Tufts University. After she graduated in 

1997, Mary worked for a software company where her responsibilities included project 

management, design, and development of software applications, primarily for the credit card 

industry. In 2001, Mary returned to transportation and the Volpe Center. Her current work for 

FRA includes research on organizational safety at railroads, and the development of a 

computerized aid for railroad traffic planning. 

Thomas Raslear is the Senior Human Factors Program Manager in FRA’s Office of Research 

and Development. He is a member and former chair of the Department of Transportation’s 

Human Factors Coordinating Committee. During his more than 11 yr at FRA, Tom has 

sponsored several of the dispatcher projects that were presented at this meeting. Tom earned a 

Ph.D. in experimental psychology from Brown University. 

Leo McCann is currently serving his second term as President of the American Train 

Dispatchers Association. He has 30 yr experience in the railroad industry. Besides train 

dispatching; Leo has worked as a block operator, freight agent, intermodal supervisor, and Labor 

Relations officer. Railroading is an inherited trait in Leo’s family. His father worked as a 

locomotive engineer for 42 yr and his grandfather performed service as a conductor for 50 yr. 

All three generations have their roots beginning with the Pennsylvania Railroad. Prior to 

becoming President, Leo also served as ATDA Secretary-Treasurer. While working as a train 

dispatcher in the Conrail Pittsburgh office, he held the positions of General Chairman, Vice 

General Chairman and Local Chairman. 

John Campbell has been with CSX since 1970 and has been involved with dispatching since 

1974. He has held numerous operating positions including operator, clerical yardmaster, train 

dispatcher, chief dispatcher, and director. Currently he is General Manager of Dispatching in 

Jacksonville. John’s current focus is on CSX’s Next Generation Dispatching System. 

Carl Barneyback has worked in the railroad industry for 16 yr. Prior to joining the Indiana 

Harbor Belt Railroad, he was with the Santa Fe and the Chicago South Shore and Southbend. He 

has gone from pulling pins, wrestling with “armstrong” levers and dispatching with train orders 

to managing on of the busiest terminal traffic control office in the U.S. He currently manages 

the IHB Operations Center in Calumet City, IL, which is a joint facility with CSX. On a daily 

basis, this office handles thousands of rail movements of over a dozen rail carriers in the Chicago 

area. 
57

Gary Lettengarver began his railroad career with Penn Central as a Block Operator. In 1976, 

he was he was promoted to Train Dispatcher at Conrail, and held positions as Assistant Chief 

Dispatcher and Chief Dispatcher. From 1983 to 1992, he was a Station Master and then 

Supervisor of Operations at Chicago Union Station for Amtrak. 

In 1992, Gary was selected as Superintendent of Dispatching for the soon-to-be commuter rail 

service, Metrolink. One of his proudest accomplishments is participating as a Metrolink team 

member working to meet the October 26, 1992 inaugural grand opening. He saw the system 

grow from one sub-division and one dispatching desk overseeing 12 daily trains on 32 mi of 

railroad to seven sub-divisions, four dispatching desks, overseeing more than 270 passenger and 

freight trains daily in a territory covering 512 mi in Southern California. Gary is the currently 

the Superintendent of Dispatching for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority which 

operates the Metrolink service in a six-county area. 

59

Appendix D. 

Speaker and Panelist Slides 

1 - 4007

Selection of Selection of 

Railroad Dispatcher Candidates Railroad Dispatcher Candidates

Judith Gertler Judith Gertler

Foster-Miller, Inc. Miller, Inc.

September 30, 2004 September 30, 2004

Scottsdale, AZ Scottsdale, AZ

2 - 4007

Agenda

 Background Background

 Process for developing a selection program Process for developing a selection program

 Successful railroad strategies Successful railroad strategies

 Potential sources of dispatcher candidates Potential sources of dispatcher candidates

 Recommendations Recommendations
60

3 - 4007

Background

 Traditional career path from Traditional career path from 

tower operator to dispatcher tower operator to dispatcher 

no longer exists no longer exists

 Railroads forced to recruit Railroads forced to recruit 

elsewhere elsewhere

 Cost to train dispatcher Cost to train dispatcher 

$50,000 $50,000

 Participants at October 1998 Participants at October 1998 

conference sought guidance conference sought guidance 

and information and information

4 - 4007

Process for Development Process for Development

of a Selection Program

Implementation of

Selection Program

Identification of

Appropriate Assessment

Methods/Instruments

Assessment 

Instrument Instrument

Development/

Identification Identification

Validation of

Methods/Instruments

Identification of

Necessary KSAO’s Employee

Specification Specification

Identification of Job

Tasks, Duties,

Work Behaviors

Job Analysis Job Analysis

5 - 4007

Elements of PAQ

Job Analysis Job Analysis

Job

Description

PAQ

Interviews

Work

Behavior

Job

Dimensions

Dispatcher Training

Requirements Study

Employee Specification Employee Specification

Knowledge

Skills

• Psychomotor

• Physical

Abilities

• Sensory

• Perceptual

• Cognitive

Other Characteristics

• Interest

• Temperament
61

6 - 4007

Job Analysis Job Analysis

Distribution of Interviewees Distribution of Interviewees

Total 36 12

BNSF 24 8

Conrail Shared Assets 3 1

Metra 3 1

Metro/North 6 2

Number of 

Interview Groups

Number of

Interviewees

Dispatching

Operation

7 - 4007

Knowledge Requirements Knowledge Requirements

 High school degree High school degree

 Specialized knowledge Specialized knowledge 

typically learned on typically learned on-the-job

8 - 4007

Skill Requirements Skill Requirements

Skill Attribute

Physical None

Psychomotor Simple reaction time
62

9 - 4007

Ability Requirements Ability Requirements

Short-term memory, long-term memory, 

intelligence, convergent thinking, 

divergent thinking, problem sensitivity, 

verbal comprehension

Cognitive

Closure, perceptual speed, selective 

attention, time sharing

Perceptual

Sensory Auditory acuity

Ability Attribute

10 - 4007

Other Characteristics Other Characteristics

Pressure of time, attainment of set 

standards, measurable/verifiable 

criteria, sensory alertness, 

conflicting/ambiguous information, 

working under specific instructions, 

social welfare

Temperament

Directing/controlling/planning,

variety of duties

Interest

Characteristic Attribute

11 - 4007

Highest Ranked Skills, Abilities, Highest Ranked Skills, Abilities,

Other Characteristics Other Characteristics

 Pressure of time (O) Pressure of time (O)

 Attainment of set standards (O) Attainment of set standards (O)

 Closure (A) Closure (A)

 Measurable, verifiable criteria (O) Measurable, verifiable criteria (O)

 Perceptual speed (A) Perceptual speed (A)

 Sensory alertness (O) Sensory alertness (O)

 Selective attention (A) Selective attention (A)
63

12 - 4007

Assessment Methods Assessment Methods

Interview

Test

Interview

Test

Interest

Temperament

Other 

Characteristics

Test

Interview

References

Test

Sensory - auditory

Perceptual

Cognitive

Abilities

Skills Psychomotor Test

Interview

Biodata questionnaire

References

Knowledge Railroading, dispatching

Characteristic Item Method(s)

13 - 4007

Interviews Interviews

 Most suitable for assessing Most suitable for assessing 

personal relations, good personal relations, good 

citizenship and job knowledge citizenship and job knowledge

 Effective interview must be Effective interview must be 

structured structured and conducted conducted

by a skilled interviewer by a skilled interviewer

14 - 4007

Biodata Inventory Inventory

 Application blank collects job Application blank collects job-related factual related factual 

information from the candidate information from the candidate

 Each question weighted to reflect ability to Each question weighted to reflect ability to 

differentiate good versus poor performers differentiate good versus poor performers

 Items must deal with events under applicant’s control Items must deal with events under applicant’s control

 Easy to administer Easy to administer

 Validation time consuming Validation time consuming
64

15 - 4007

Case Study Sites Case Study Sites

24

32

Conrail Shared Assets

Wisconsin Central

Shortline/Regional

485

375

BNSF

UP

Class I

24

52

33

Metra

Metro-North

LIRR

Commuter

Type Railroad Total Staff

16 - 4007

Successful Strategies Successful Strategies

 Class 1’s have dispatcher aptitude/screening test Class 1’s have dispatcher aptitude/screening test

 Metro-North developed test battery North developed test battery

 All use interviews and selection by All use interviews and selection by

committee consensus committee consensus

 Internet job posting (UP) Internet job posting (UP)

 Pre-screen by testing for ability to learn railroad screen by testing for ability to learn railroad 

terminology(LIRR) terminology(LIRR)

17 - 4007

Overall Selection Procedure Overall Selection Procedure

Selection

Panel

Screen for Education

and Experience

Not Suitable Ability Test

Not Suitable Not Suitable Interview
65

18 - 4007

Jobs Requiring Jobs Requiring SAO’s Similar to Similar to

Railroad Dispatcher Railroad Dispatcher

Mining Mine and quarry dispatcher

Alarm operator, radio dispatcher, protectivesignal operator, telecommunicatorProtective 

Services

Bus and trolley dispatcher, traffic or system 

dispatcher, tugboat dispatcher, motor vehicle 

dispatcher, interstate bus dispatcher

Transportation

Gas dispatcher, service or work dispatcher, 

radioactive waste disposal dispatcher, cable 

dispatcher, oil dispatcher

Utilities

Industry Jobs

19 - 4007

Recommendations Recommendations

 Composite job analysis a starting point for Composite job analysis a starting point for 

organizations lacking resources to conduct organizations lacking resources to conduct

job analysis job analysis

 Structured interviews preferable Structured interviews preferable

 Use only Use only reliable reliable test instruments test instruments

 “Job preview” may help to assess “will do” “Job preview” may help to assess “will do” 

characteristics of candidates characteristics of candidates

 Explore candidates in similar occupations Explore candidates in similar occupations

in other industries in other industries
66

Union Pacific Union Pacific 

Hiring

and 

Candidate Candidate

Selection Process Selection Process

Retention Retention Issues

Jan 1999 Jan 1999- May 2004 May 2004

 Failure during training 8%

 Dismissal 7%

 Resign/Exercise Seniority 20%

Application Review Characteristics and Application Review Characteristics and 

Screening Mechanism

Experience Application 

 Train Dispatcher or other railroad experience Preemployment Test

 Air Traffic Control Interview Process

 Military Logistics

 4 Years Managerial Experience in any industry

 4 Years Railroad Experience

Education

 BA or BS preferred

 Transportation, Logistics, Bus Admin, Economics preferred
67

Application Review Characteristics Application Review Characteristics 

and Screening Mechanism and Screening Mechanism

Work Ethic Issues Interview Process

 Multiple jobs at same time Work History

 Work through college Legacy Referrals

 Maturity and motivation

 Periods of unemployment

Application Review Characteristic Application Review Characteristic 

and Screening Mechanism and Screening Mechanism

Dispatching Issues

 Attention to detail Interview Process

 Adherence to predetermined rules and policies

 Planning and coordination skills

 Decisive and assertive

Application Review Characteristics Application Review Characteristics 

and Screening Mechanism and Screening Mechanism

Competitive Pay Application

 Furloughed or cut off from higher paying job Interview Process 

 History of Job Hopping Legacy Referrals

 Employment / compensation need

Lifestyle Tolerance

 Experience with irregular hours, weekends, holidays

 Willingness to work irregular hours, weekends, holidays

 Employment in demanding work environment

Craft Seniority

 + Maintenance of Way

 + Mechanical

 - Clerical

 - Train Service
68

•H.R. administers Management test and selects top 

candidates to interview.

•H.R. and HDC reviews & selects top candidates from 

internet applications

Candidate Hiring Process Candidate Hiring Process

•The HDC interview team interviews the top candidates 

selecting the best to become Apprentice Dispatchers

•Four MOTDS -Managers of Train Dispatchers and four 

Managers with Train Dispatching back ground or active 

Train Dispatchers make up the HDC interview team

Candidate Selection Process Candidate Selection Process

Territory Familiarization Process Territory Familiarization Process

Apprentice Train Dispatchers complete Apprentice Train Dispatchers complete 

three months of class room training and three months of class room training and 

three months of on the job training. three months of on the job training.

After completion of their on After completion of their on-the-job 

training, the employee will work for 4 to 6 training, the employee will work for 4 to 6 

weeks as a Train Dispatcher and then take weeks as a Train Dispatcher and then take 

a territory familiarization trip. a territory familiarization trip.
69

Railroad Dispatcher Workload, 

Stress and Fatigue

Railroad Dispatching Operations:

Putting Research into Practice

Stephen Popkin, Ph.D.

2004 September 30

This work was conducted by Foster-Miller under FRA Contract 

DTFR53-95-C-0049, Task Order No. 6

2

Background

• This was a larger, multi-year effort precipitated by:

– Problems identified by FRA safety audits 

– Dispatcher-caused accidents

– A concern for the dispatchers’ health and well-being

“A Preliminary Examination of Railroad Dispatcher Workload, Stress, and 

Fatigue, DOT/FRA/ORD-01/08”

• Goals of this project were to:

– Identify sources of workload, stress and fatigue

– Evaluate field methods to measure these outcomes

3

Presentation Topics

• Methodology

• Demographics

• Workplace Context

• Workload

• Stress

• Fatigue

• Conclusions
70

Methodology

5

Key Points

• Naturalistic field study

• No controls or manipulations

• Convenience sample

• Two locations involved

– Freight (n=20)

– Passenger (n=17)

• Data collected from all three shifts

– Day: 7am-3pm

– Evening: 3pm-11pm

– Night: 11pm-7am

6

Measurement Instruments

Background

Information Survey

Workload

Observation

Dispatcher records

Subjective ratings

Stress Cortisol measurement

Subjective rating

Fatigue

Actigraphy

Sleep logs

Subjective rating
71

7

Procedure

Daily

Sleep Log Sleep Log

& Actiwatch

mTAWL

Subjective

Ratings & Ratings &

Cortisol Cortisol

Site 

Selection

Participant

Recruitment Recruitment

Instructions Instructions

& Background & Background

Survey

Debriefing Debriefing

Survey

Dispatcher Sample 

Demographics

9

Demographic Data

 Freight (n=20) Passenger (n-17) 

Sex (percent male) 90 76 

Age (subjective) 43.5 (35) 43 (36.5) 

Overweight [US - 64%] 74% 82% 

Months at job 99.5 100 

Percent moonlighting [US - 6%] 15 0 

Percent married [US - 57%] 80 59 

Children 1.5 1.6 

Years of education 12 to 16 12 to 16 
72

10

Employment Background

P osition N um ber 

B lock operators 11 (29.7% ) 

R ailroad clerks 10 (27.1% ) 

R ailroad operations 6 (16.2% ) 

O ther railroad po sitions 3 (8.1% ) 

N on-railroad 7 (18.9% ) 

11

Age Range 

25 to 44 (n=26) 45 to 59 (n=11) 

Anxiety 115.4 (126) 90.9 (126) 

Asthma 0 (60.7) 0 (31.4) 

Back pain 307.7 (42.4) 272.7 (110.3) 

Depression 38.5 (50) 181.8 (50) 

Gastrointestinal 38.5 (2.7 to 24.9) 90.0 (7.2 to 33.5) 

Headaches 230.8 (21.8) 90.9 (31.7) 

Heart disease 38.5 (24) 0 (143.1) 

Hypertension 38.5 (34) 181.8 (233.2) 

Skin disorders 153.8 (5.4 to 33.3) 0 (4.1 to 26.8) 

Sleep problems 269.2 (350) 363.6 (350) 

Dispatcher Health versus U.S. Norms

Rate per 1000

Workplace Context
73

13

Physical Environment

F a c to r % A c c e p ta b le 

L ig h tin g 7 0 % 

N o is e 6 2 % 

Tem perature 57 % 

A ir Q uality 49 % 

14

Work Period

• Majority (89%) scheduled to work five 

consecutive days

• Over half report working 8 hrs or more 

overtime per week

• Overall, 27% reported “expected to work 

overtime”

15

Work-Related Daily Time

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Median Time (hrs)

Freight

Passenger

Overall

At Work R/T Commute
74

16

Effect of Long Commute Time

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

Fatigue Rating

0 100 200 300 400 500 

Time on Shift (minutes)

1-44 min commute

45-75 min commute

76+ min commute

Fatigue Rating as a function of

commute time and time on shift

17

Break Patterns

Breaks per shift (median) 4 

Difficulty getting 

coverage 

65% 

Too busy for break 

 Occasionally 

 Frequently 

57% 

41% 

Meals eaten at desk 97% 

18

Volume and Pace 

of Work

 % R ep o rtin g 

Often or 

Very Often 

W orking fast 84% 

Large volum e of work 81% 

Heavy concentration 95% 

Heavy memory usage 97% 

Lulls between heavy 

periods 22% 
75

19

Work Performance

% O ften or 

Very O ften

B ending rules to com plete job 9 % 

A ssignm ents w ithout support 14 % 

C om prehension of w ork 

expectations 86 % 

Able to handle em ergencies 95 % 

20

Workplace 

Control Issues

Factor

% Reporting Moderate or

High Level of Control

Work quality 97 %

Task ordering 81 %

Number simultaneous tasks 57 %

Work pace 43 %

Policy decisions 16 %

Workload
76

22

Contributors to Dispatcher 

Workload (FRA, 1995)

• Number of trains handled

• Number of authorities issued

• Number of control points in territory

• Total track miles

• Number, type and effectiveness of communications

• Methods of operation

• Administrative duties and paperwork

23

Yerkes-Dodson U (1908)

Task A

τ1 Task B

Task B

τ2

WORKLOAD

24

Wickens Attention Model (2002)

Perception

Short-term 

sensory 

store

Feedback

Response 

execution

Decision & 

response 

selection

Attention 

resources

Responses

Memory

Stimuli

Attention 

Resources

Working 

memory

Long-term 

memory

INFORMATION PROCESSING MODEL



τ

Fatigue

Stress
77

25

mTAWL Channel Loadings

Channels 

 Auditory Visual Cognitive Motor

F 1 0 0 0 Background auditory monitoring P 2 0 0 0 

F 0 1 1 0 Background visual monitoring P 0 2 0 0 

F 3 1 2 2 Background radio/telephone P 4 1 2 1 

F 3 1 2 2 Foreground radio/telephone P 3 1 3 1 

F 0 2 2 6 Background clerical P 0 2 2 3 

F 1 1 1 1 Planning for unopposed track movement P 1 1 2 0 

F 1 1 1 1 Handling unopposed track movement P 1 2 2 2 

F 1 1 3 1 Planning for opposed track movement P 2 1 3 0 

F 1 1 3 2 Handling opposed track movement P 3 1 3 2 

F 0 2 2 6 Foreground clerical P 2 2 3 5 

26

Passenger Dispatcher mTAWL

Workload Across Shift

-3.00

-2.00

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6:527:167:408:048:288:529:159:39

10:0210:2610:5011:1411:3812:0212:2612:5013:1413:3814:0214:26

Time

Auditory

Visual

Cognitive

Psychomotor

27

Passenger mTAWL Overload

Rating by Desk

Date Shift Desk 

% of Time 

Overloaded 

within Shift 

% of Time 

Overloaded 

Across Desks 

14 Sep 1 1 4.5% 0.0% 

15 Sep 1 2 0.0% 0.0% 

16 Sep 1 3 6.7% 21.0% 

17 Sep 1 2 4.0% 0.2% 

18 Sep 1 4 1.0% 1.3% 

19 Sep 1 5 2.5% 0.0% 

20 Sep 1 5 2.6% 0.0% 

21 Sep 1 6 2.1% 4.2% 

22 Sep 1 1 7.5% 0.0% 

23 Sep 2 2 0.9% 0.0% 

24 Sep 2 4 0.0% 0.0% 

25 Sep 3 7 4.5% 0.0% 
78

28

Number of Trains and Users by 

Hour into Day Shift

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2 hours

4 hours

6 hours

8 hours

Time into shift

Number Reported

No. Trains - Freight

No. Track Users - Freight

No. Trains - Passenger

No. Track Users - Passenger

29

Number of Trains and Users by Hour 

into Afternoon Shift

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2 hours

4 hours

6 hours

8 hours

Time into shift

Number Reported

No. Trains - Freight

No. Track Users - Freight

No. Trains - Passenger

No. Track Users - Passenger

30

Number of Trains and Users by Hour 

into Night Shift

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2 hours

4 hours

6 hours

8 hours

Time into shift

Number Reported

No. Trains - Freight

No. Track Users - Freight

No. Trains - Passenger

No. Track Users - Passenger
79

31

Subjective Workload

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

7am

9am

11am

1pm

3pm

5pm

7pm

9pm

11pm

1am

3am

5am

7am

Subjective Rating

Freight Passenger

32

Freight Form Ds and Subjective 

Workload Across 24 Hours

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

9AM

11AM

1PM

3PM

5PM

7PM

9PM

11PM

1AM

3AM

5AM

7AM

Time

Subjective Rating

0

1

2

3

4

5

Ave. Number Form

Ds Issued/Canceled

Average Subjective Workload

Average No. Form Ds

33

Workload Conclusions

• mTAWL appears to be a possible metric for 

documenting a desk suspected of having a workload 

imbalance

• Subjective feelings of workload seem independent 

of number of Form Ds, route blocks, and number 

of train and track users handled

• Subjective workload measurements did not reveal 

perceptions of excessively high workload in the 

aggregate
80

Stress

35

NIOSH (1995)

• 40% of workers reported their job was very or 

extremely stressful; 

• 25% view their jobs as the number one stressor 

in their lives;

• 29% of workers felt quite a bit or extremely 

stressed at work;

• 26 percent of workers said they were "often or 

very often burned out or stressed by their work";

• Job stress is more strongly associated with health 

complaints than financial or family problems.

36

Gallup (2000)

• 80% of workers feel stress on the job, nearly half say they 

need help in learning how to manage stress and 42% say their 

coworkers need such help; 

• 14% of respondents had felt like striking a coworker in the 

past year, but didn't; 

• 25% have felt like screaming or shouting because of job 

stress, 10% are concerned about an individual at work they 

fear could become violent;

• 9% are aware of an assault or violent act in their workplace 

and 18% had experienced some sort of threat or verbal 

intimidation in the past year.
81

37

Evidence of Workplace Stress

• 73% “rarely” or “never” lose temper at work

• 92% reported other dispatchers “sometimes” or 

“frequently” lose temper Take Stress Home

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Overall Freight Passenger

Percentage Responding "YES"

38

Level of Dispatcher Conflict and 

Cooperation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Chief

T&E

Maint

Disp

Manag

Percent Responding 

"Somewhat" or "Very Much"

Conflict Cooperation

39

Dispatchers’ Subjective 

Responses and Behaviors

• Nearly all (97%) felt “a great deal” of 

responsibility

• 43% reported “a lot” or “a great deal” of 

anxiety

• 63% “never” or “rarely” called in sick due to 

stress
82

40

Sources of Dispatcher Stress 

(FRA, 1995)

• Work overload or surges

• Juggling maintenance and traffic

• Ambiguous rules and procedures

• Inconsistent application of rules

• Safety responsibilities

• Threat of relocation

• Radio interference

• Training

• New technology

41

Source of Stress by Type of 

Operation

9=30%, 99=40%, 999=50+%

Factor Overall Freight Passenger 

Management Policies 9 99

Demands of T&E and MOW crews 9

Personality conflicts with T&E and MOW crews 99

Amount of work 9 9

Difficulty of work 9

Pace of work 99 999

Lack of control 9

Surges in workload 9

Juggling T&E and MOW needs 99 999

Quality of workstation and equipment 99

Communication problems 9 999

Unnecessary phone calls 99

Duplicate reporting procedures 9

Training new dispatchers 99

42

Sources of Stress by Job Tenure

9=30%, 99=40%, 999=50+%

Factor Overall < 2 yrs 2 to 5 yrs > 5 hrs

Management Policies 9 9 99

Demands of T&E and MOW crews 9 9

Personality conflicts with crews 999 9 

Personality conflicts with other dispatchers 9 

Amount of work 9 999 9

Pace of work 99 999 9

Lack of control 9

Emergencies 999 

Surges in workload 999 9

Juggling T&E and MOW needs 99 999

Loss of sleep 999 

Physical environment 9 9 

Quality of workstation and equipment 999 9

Communication problems 9 9 9

Unnecessary phone calls 999 9

Duplicate reporting procedures 999 9
83

43

Self-Reported Contributors to

Job Stress

• No rest breaks

• Always working with a different crew

• Number of concurrent tasks

• Equipment design and failure

• Emergencies and unexpected events

• Office environment

• Personality conflicts

• Training

• Management meddling

44

Subjective Time Pressure

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

7am

9am

11am

1pm3pm

5pm

7pm

9pm

11pm

1am

3am

5am

7am

Subjective Rating

Freight

Passenger

45

Salivary Cortisol Levels by Operation and 

Shift

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

7am9am

11am

1pm3pm

5pm

7pm

9pm

11pm

1am

3am

5am7am

ug/dl

Freight

Passenger
84

46

Stress Conclusions

• Most reported stressors not directly related

to workload

• No physiological indication of heightened stress*

• Subjective stress generally increases through shift, 

though never reaches top quartile

Fatigue

48

Fatigue Puzzle

Sleep Loss

Noise, Vibration 

& Temperature 

Workload, 

Stress & 

Monotony

Aging, 

Health

Ergonomic 

Design

Disrupted 

Work/Rest 

cycles

Nutrition & 

Conditioning OTC Medications, 

drugs & Alcohol
85

49

Influence of Time of Day and

Time Awake on Alertness

(Åkerstedt et al., 1995)

50

Subjective Fatigue

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

7am9am

11am

1pm3pm

5pm

7pm9pm

11pm

1am3am

5am7am

SubjectiveRating

Passenger

Freight

51

Daily Sleep Patterns

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1st 2nd 3rd NWD WD

Minutes

Sleep length Nap length
86

52

Shift 

D A N X O 

Problem falling asleep (% yes) 33 33 40 27 32 

 Frequency of problem 

(days/week) 2.5 4 2 2 2 

Problem with frequent 

awakenings 33 33 60 46 46 

 Frequency of problem 5.5 4 5 2 4 

Problem with early 

awakenings 33 33 60 27 35 

 Frequency of problem 5.5 2 3 3 3 

Frequency of waking up tired: 

 W orkdays 33 17 80 36 41 

 Non-workdays 33 17 40 9 22 

Rate and Frequency

of Sleep-Related Problems

53

Fatigue Conclusions

• Cumulative subjective fatigue throughout all 

shifts

• Sleep patterns typical of other shiftworkers

• No evidence of significant acute sleep debt

• Napping strategy employed by majority of night 

shift

54

Overall Conclusions

• Workplace stress appears to be function of not 

only volume of work but also environmental and 

interpersonal issues

• While observed levels of stress and fatigue are 

characteristic of shift workers, there is evidence of 

consistently increasing levels throughout all shifts

• Due to location specific characteristics and limited 

sample size, results may not be representative of 

US dispatcher population
87

55

Possible Next Step

Team Cognitive Task Analysis

Thordsen & Klein (1989) have suggested “[one 

can] consider a team as an intelligent entity. 

Teams possess information, make decisions, 

solve problems, and develop plans”

57

Freight Form Ds Across 24 

Hours

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

9AM

11AM

1PM

3PM

5PM

7PM9PM

11PM

1AM

3AM

5AM

7AM

Time

Average Number of Form Ds Issued/Canceled

First Shift Second Shift Third Shift

58

Freight Form Ds Across Week

0

5

10

15

20

25

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

Sun

Day of Week

Average Number of

Form Ds issued/Canceled

Day Afternoon Night
88

59

Passenger Form Ds Across 

Week

0

5

10

15

20

25

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

Sun

Day of Week

Average Number of Form Ds Issued/Canceled

Day Afternoon Night

60

Passenger Form Ds and Subjective 

Workload Across 24 Hours

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

9AM

11AM

1PM

3PM

5PM

7PM

9PM

11PM

1AM

3AM

5AM

7AM

Time

Subjective Rating

0

1

2

3

4

5

Ave. Number of Form

Ds Issued/Canceled

Average Subjective Workload

Average No. Form Ds

61

Sleep Length

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Overall 1st 2nd 3rd NWD WD

Minutes

Subjective Actiwatch
89

62

Sleep Strategies

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1st 2nd 3rd NWD WD

Percent Responding "YES"

Napping

Sleep Aids
90

1

Using Actigraphs to Improve Sleep 

Hygiene with Dispatchers

Patrick Sherry, Ph.D.

University of Denver

September 2004

2

3⁄4This research was supported by a grants 

from the FRA Office of Safety, the 

National Center for Intermodal 

Transportation, and the Burlington 

Northern Sante Fe.

3

Background

3⁄4 Studying Dispatchers since 1990

3⁄4 First Dispatcher Aptitude Tests (1991)

3⁄4 Job Stress in Dispatchers (Weller, 1992)

3⁄4 Fatigue in Dispatchers (Sherry, 1997)

3⁄4 Self-efficacy & Job stress (Diem & Sherry, 2003)
91

4

The Experience

5

An email

3⁄4 I am doing fine. I personally do not feel my fatigue level has 

changed. Mainly because my job has changed and being on a swing shift, 

2 days 0700-1500, 2 days 1500-2300 and the third day either 1500-2300, 

or 2300-0700. It is difficult with that kind of schedule to get into any 

sleeping pattern. I fall asleep around seven or eight at night when I have to work the early shift, then try and stay up late my second day of early 

shift so I can work the evening shift the next day. If I don't stay up late, 

I get up at the crack of dawn, then too tired to work seconds. If I have to 

work the third shift my last day, I don't get much rest that day at all. I try 

to take a nap in the afternoon, but am seldom able to. Therefore, the first 

day of my days off, I spend sleeping. I am almost 60 years old now, and it 

is not natural to spend the night staying up all night. Therefore, on 

Saturday, after sleeping most of Friday, I feel drugged and am not able to 

accomplish anything at home. So, I don't ever feel like I have any days off. I am changing jobs again, going back to straight second shift with 

weekends off, so hopefully, I can get more rest.

6

Project Objectives
92

7

Objectives

3⁄4 Continue developing ways to implement 

Actigraph technology as a fatigue 

countermeasures 

3⁄4 Provide an intervention tailored to personnel not 

in the road/train service

3⁄4 Work more closely with 

management/supervisors in fatigue 

management

3⁄4 Integrate coaching with feedback technology

8

Objective Measures

3⁄4 Actigraphs enable an 

objective assessment 

of the hours of sleep 

obtained by 

individuals in a study.

9

Sample Characteristics

3⁄4 Dispatchers volunteered 

for project 

3⁄4 Began with 4 women and 

31 (88%) men

3⁄4 Finished with 2 women 

and 18 men (90%)

3⁄4 Several people from each 

shift

3⁄4 Majority from third shift

Shift worked

8 22.9

5 14.3

12 34.3

7 20.0

3 8.6

35 100.0

First

Second

Third

Variable

Extra

Total

Valid

Frequency Percent
93

10

Amount of Sleep

3⁄4Examining the statistics we can see that 

on the average 

3⁄4Day shift received 5.51 hours of sleep

3⁄4Night shift received 6.48 hours of sleep

3⁄4People who volunteered for the study may 

have had more sleep issues than the 

average persons

11

Report

epp

10.8750 8 5.46253

9.2000 5 4.91935

9.7778 9 4.60374

10.2857 7 3.81725

9.0000 3 3.60555

10.0000 32 4.40674

Shift worked

First

Second

Third

Variable

Extra

Total

Mean N Std. Deviation

12

No difference between shifts on Eppworth at T1

Report

epp

10.8750 8 5.46253

9.2000 5 4.91935

9.7778 9 4.60374

10.2857 7 3.81725

10.1034 29 4.52252

shift_3

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

Total

Mean N Std. Deviation
94

13

Project Design

T1

Wear Performance 

Feedback Watch 

(30 days)

T2

Wear Regular 

Actigraph Watch 

(30 days)

Baseline Wear 

Regular Actigraph 

Watch (30 days)

T3

Feedback, 

identify 

goals, ask 

“How will 

you use the 

information?

Feedback, 

identify 

goals, ask 

“How will 

you continue 

to change?

14

Coaching Protocol

Provide Feedback from BASELINE Actigraphs

15

Third Shift Actigraph
95

16

Supervisor Actigraph

17

Coaching Intervention

3⁄4Identify areas in need of improvement

3⁄4Identify one goal to address

3⁄4Discuss ways to make changes

3⁄4Discuss how use the information from the 

watch 

18

Evaluation

3⁄4Average amount of sleep for 

30 day period

3⁄4Repeated measures analysis

3⁄4Self-report data

3⁄4Qualitative data - testimonials
96

19

Drop Outs

3⁄4No differences in severity of sleep issues 

between initiators and completers at pretest.

3⁄4People who stayed in the study were 

more likely to report that they had NOT 

had significant changes in their sleep 

habits recently. Drop outs reported more 

more recent changes in sleep habits.

20

Pre-test

3⁄4 No significant 

difference between 

groups on severity of 

sleep concerns

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00

shift

9.00

9.50

10.00

10.50

11.00

M

e

a

n

o

f

E

p

p

w

o

r

t

h

Results –

Overall

3⁄4 For both 

shifts 

combined 

the average 

amount of 

sleep 

increased by 

10% overall

3⁄4 ns

123

TIme Period

340

350

360

370

M

i

n

u

t

e

s

o

f

S

l

e

e

p

Mean Sleep Minutes Over Three Time Periods (180 days)
97

Resultsfor Minutes of Sleep

3⁄4 Combined first and 

second shifts into DAY

3⁄4 Looks like the day 

shift improved from 

T1 to T2 and then 

went back to T1 level

3⁄4 Night shift seemed to 

change very little and 

then improve

3⁄4 May be important to 

study habit change in 

different shifts 123

TIme Period

300

320

340

360

380

400

420

440

M

e

a

n

S

l

e

e

p

M

i

n

u

t

e

s

Shift

Day

Night

Minutes of Sleep at Three Time Periods by Day and Night Shift Night Shift

ResultsWake Minutes

3⁄4 Minutes awake 

decreased 

somewhat over 

the three time 

periods for all 

participants by 

10% 

3⁄4 ns

123

Time Period

940

960

980

1,000

1,020

1,040

1,060

M

e

a

n

M

i

n

u

t

e

s

A

w

a

k

e

Average Minutes Awake for Three Time Periods

Results –

Wake Minutes

3⁄4 Minutes of 

Wakefulness 

decreased (not 

statistically 

significant-univariate) 

after dispatchers wore 

the performance 

actigraphs and then 

again after wearing 

the non-performance 

actigraphs 12 3

TIme Period

950

1000

1050

1100

A

v

e

r

a

g

e

M

i

n

u

t

e

s

A

w

a

k

e

Shift

Day

NIght

Average Minutes Awake for Three Time Periods by SHift

Consolidation
98

25

Third Shift Only

3⁄4 A large but non significant improvement of 

over 12% in amount of sleep obtained.

3⁄4 Variability is large due to small sample size.

Descriptive Statistics (hrs)

6.26 .940

6.04 1.190

7.13 2.770

t1Sleep Minutes

t2 Sleep Minutes

t3 Sleep Minutes

Mean Std. Deviation

26

Combined First & Second Shifts 

3⁄4 Found a significant 

22% increase in the 

amount of sleep from 

5 hrs to 6.2 hrs of 

sleep between T1 and 

T2

3⁄4 But returns to only 

5% to 5.3 hrs at T3

3⁄4 Only 6 people 123

Time Period

300

310

320

330

340

350

360

370

S

l

e

e

p

M

i

n

u

t

e

s

Combined First & Second Shift Avg Minutes of Sleep

27

Some Limitations

3⁄4 Self-selection – drop outs initially more 

concerned with changes in sleep 

behavior

3⁄4 Small sample size -> low power, high 

variability

3⁄4 Night shift more interested – 3rd shift 

recognizes that they have sleep issues

3⁄4 “never felt rested”

3⁄4 Night more motivated to change (??)
99

28

Accuracy of the feedback numbers

3⁄4This question assessed whether the 

participants felt that the number on the 

performance feedback watches accurately 

reflected how tired or rested they felt.

3⁄444.5% of participants felt that the numbers 

were accurate most of the time 

3⁄444.5% felt as though the numbers were not 

accurate most of the time

3⁄411% felt as though the numbers were 

accurate some of the time 

29

Liked Best

30

Best aspects of the watch

3⁄4100% stated that they liked how the 

performance watches made them more 

aware and more conscious of their fatigue 

levels. When asked what additional effects 

an increased awareness had on their 

behavior, 60% stated that they were 

more apt to do things to counter their 

fatigue and get more rest. 
100

31

Benefits

32

How helpful - One to five

33

Helpfulness Performance 

Watch

3⁄4 Participants rated how helpful they felt the 

feedback information was in allowing them to 

manage their fatigue

3⁄4 56% felt as though it was somewhat to very 

helpful 

3⁄4 44% felt as though it was not helpful

3⁄4 Of the 56% who found it to be somewhat to 

very helpful, 60% worked third shift, 30% 

worked 1st shift, and 10% worked 2nd shift
101

Improvements

35

Needed Improvement

3⁄4 100% suggested making it more comfortable

3⁄4 more stylish

3⁄4 A beeper

3⁄4 50% suggested increasing accuracy and 

precision of performance numbers

36

Sleep Disorders 
102

37

Main symptoms of Apnea

38

Benefits of CPAP

39

Summary

3⁄4 when the participants felt as though the watch was accurate, they 

were more inclined to use the feedback number along with the 

fatigue countermeasures to manage their fatigue. For many this 

consisted of doing things that they previously were not doing and as 

a result they found the watch and coaching sessions to be helpful in 

alleviating fatigue. 

3⁄4 Others were already using various countermeasures to combat 

fatigue and for most of these individuals the performance watch did 

not provide any additional assistance in enhancing fatigue 

management. These were also individuals who reported fewer 

problems with fatigue in the first place. 

3⁄4 A third group of individuals likely felt some concerns about fatigue 

and the sleep watch was able to confirm or disconfirm their fears

3⁄4 Seems to be useful for a little less than half the population
103

40

Lessons

3⁄4Improved the coaching and education

3⁄4Identified better measures

3⁄4Identified characteristics of likely 

candidates

3⁄4Watch issues

3⁄4Model issues

41

Next Steps

3⁄4Address higher risk population

3⁄4Increase power
104

American Rail Dispatching 

Center

“The 21st Century Short Line 

Dispatching Center”

ARDC – Why 21st Century? Century? 

z ARDC “Who we are and what we do” 

– Stats - Continuity in procedures 

z Safety 

– Emergency Response and Preparedness 

z Control System – Dispatch Office Controller DOC®

z Weather Alertness – Advanced Warnings

z Radio & Telephonic Communication (recorded)

z ARDC Safety and Service Driven

ARDC “Who we are and what we do” “Who we are and what we do”

z ARDC Dispatches 17 railroads:

NECR – TP&W – AGR – EARY – OTVR – C&A – NCVA – VSRR – SCRF –

CPDR – CSO – MNA – WSRY – CERA – MMRR – HESR - NKCR

z Traffic Controlling for 3,000 miles

z In 19 separate U.S. States

z 500,563 Car Loads Annually

z 150 Crew Starts Per/Day

z Experienced Dispatchers – CTC, TWC, ABS, Yard Control
105

Our Class I Partners Our Class I Partners

•CSXT – Palmer, MA

•CN – East Alburg, VT

•CSXT – W.Springfield, MA

•CSXT, Boykins, VA

•CN/IC – Mobile, AL

•CSXT, Florence, SC

•CSXT – Laurens, SC 

•CSXT – Talladega, AL

•NS – Sylacauga, AL

•BNSF – Fargo, ND

•BNSF – Sterling, CO

•BNSF – Holdrege, NE

•CSXT – Mobile, AL

•NS – Peoria, IL 

•NS – Logansport, IN

•UP – Newport, AR

•UP - Kansas City, MO

•BNSF – Lamar, MO

•BNSF – Joplin, MO

•BNSF – Aurora, MO

•NS – Mobile, AL

•NS – Chesapeake, VA

•BNSF – Galesburg, IN 

•NS – Burkeville, VA

•CSXT – Lafayette, IN

•NS – Marion, IL

•CSXT – Saginaw, MI

•CN – Durand, MI

•CSXT – Hybart, AL

•UP – Watseka, IL

•UP – East Peoria, IL

•NS – Kimbrough, AL

•KCS – Joplin, MO

•CN/IC – Gilman, IL

•CSXT – Atmore, AL 

•NS – Demopolis, AL

•BNSF – Columbus, MS

• Short lines

ARDC in the News ARDC in the News
106

B.C.D. 04-29

May 27, 2004

EMPLOYER STATUS DETERMINATION

American Rail Dispatching Center, Inc.

This is the determination of the Railroad Retirement Board concerning the status of American Rail Dispatching Center, Inc (ARDC)

as an employer under the Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. § 231, et seq.) (RRA) and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act 

(45 U.S.C. § 351, et seq.) (RUIA). 

Mr. Gary Laakso, Vice President and Regulatory Counsel, ARDC, advised that ARDC commenced service on January 1, 2004. He 

stated that ARDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of RailAmerica Transportation Corp., a wholly-owned subsidiary of RailAmerica, Inc..1

Neither RailAmerica Transportation Corp. nor RailAmerica, Inc. are employers covered under the RRA and RUIA. ARDC provides 

dispatching services to railroad customers, which services include emergency incident reporting, written records of train movements 

and issuance of track warrants to train crews. These services are provided to thirteen railroad employers, all except one of which are 

owned by RailAmerica, Inc.. ARDC has no Surface Transportation Board authorization.

Section 1(a)(1) of the Railroad Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. § 231(a)(1)), insofar as relevant here defines a covered employer as:

(i) any carrier by railroad subject to the jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board under part A of subtitle IV of title 49, United 

States Code;

(ii) any company which is directly or indirectly owned or controlled by, or under common control with, one or more employers as

defined in paragraph (i) of this subdivision, and which operates any equipment or facility or performs any service (except trucking 

service, casual service, and the casual operation of equipment or facilities) in connection with the transportation of passengers or 

property by railroad * * *.

-2-

Sections 1(a) and 1(b) of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (RUIA), 45 U.S.C. 351(a) and (b), contain substantially similar 

definitions, as does section 3231 of the Railroad Retirement Tax Act (RRTA), 26 U.S.C. 3231. 

ARDC is clearly not a carrier by railroad. However, because ARDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of RailAmerica Transportation Corp., 

which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of RailAmerica, Inc., and because RailAmerica, Inc. owns or controls almost all the railroads 

which ARDC services, ARDC is under common control with a railroad employer. The evidence demonstrates that the service 

provided by ARDC to those railroads is service in connection with railroad transportation. 

In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that American Railroad Dispatching Center, Inc. became a rail carrier employer under the 

RRA and RUIA effective January 1, 2004, the date on which it commenced operations. Michael S. Schwartz

V. M. Speakman, Jr.

Jerome F Kever

ARDC Procedures ARDC Procedures • Continuity in procedures and operating practices (short 

line vs. Class I resources):

• Bulletins

• Track warrants/Track and Time

• Radio Communication

• Rules compliance

• For dispatchers and other short line employees 

z CFR 228.17 – Ensure these standards are met

• Documentation and Reporting – short lines behind Class I 

industry

• Safety and Efficiency are a result

Safety – Emergency Response and Emergency Response and 

Preparedness Preparedness

z ZERO Reportable Injury (mentality) 

z ZERO FRA Reportable Incidents

z 24-hour/365 Days a Year Emergency and Safety Coverage

z RA Hotline (50+ Railroads)

z AAR – ASLRRA

z First Response Program (Biannual)

z Emergency Training (OLI – GCCI – Continuing Education) 

z Efficiency Testing (A.R.D.C.O.T.C.P.)

z Full Compliance and Strong Relationship with FRA (9-24-01)

–“The ARDC is as professional as any Class I dispatching 

center today.”
107

Control System Control System 

zARDC had specific criteria 

– Redundant Back-up (duel servers)

– Full Conflict Checking and Validation Logic (mission critical)

– TWC – CTC (and mixed territory) – Yard Control – Single system 

– GCOR (including track bulletins A-B-C)

– Additional modules: 

z Train Sheets (CFR228.17) – TSR – OOS – AMWDM/OOS – Etc...

– Supports minimum of 5 workstations

– Microsoft Windows Operating System

• Scaleable platform - full-featured desktop applications, and complex networked system applications

• Extensible platform - supports future application growth without re-designing core

• Expandable platform - supports increasing network size without compromising performance

• COTS - utilizes commercially available hardware components, no proprietary equipment

• Open Standards - supports database,3rd party integration through open architecture (ie. SQL)

• Graphical Designer Tools - ability to modify applications without specialized training

• System Administration Tools - System Administrator may configure application functionality 

including security settings, user interface attributes, logic and rules (non-safety) 

• Seamless Expansion – Must be expandable internally TWC / CTC / SCADA /Yard system

DOC® Server
108

CTC

TWC

• Weather Warnings are track specific:

– WeatherData has track file (latitude and longitude) 

– These warnings do not repackage NWS warnings,WeatherData warnings are original 

content tailored to the railroads specific needs to enhance safety (MNA pinpoints TT). 

– National Weather Service (NWS) (county wide). 

• Stopping or slowing trains cost $$.

• Weather Warnings are time specific.

– 20 minutes prior.

• 24/7 Consulting Privileges.

– ARDC call and talk to a meteorologist any time, day or night.

– Alert not acknowledged: Expect within 2-minute to get a call from professional 

meteorologist

• Weather Warnings are tailored to railroads needs.

–Thresholds: tornadoes – heavy rain – flash flooding – 4 or more inches of snow in 12 hours 

blizzard – trace or more of ice – tropical storms or hurricanes – Temperature changes 

of 50 degrees or more in 24 hours or less – temperatures 90 degrees F or higher.

Weather Alertness Weather Alertness – WeatherData WeatherData
109

WeatherData Alert WeatherData Alert

Communication Communication – Penta

z Redundant Back-up (duel servers)

z Touch screen technology

z Radio and telephones in one system (2 & 4 wire)

z Stacking ability

z Auto answer – Auto hold 

z Record all calls and radios (email)

z Secure network

z Microsoft Windows Operating System

z Expandable – Supports multiple workstations
110

z We believe the savings are immeasurable (Safety)

z Individual Relationships with each railroad

z Our Customers

z Rail Traffic Control Services Without Discrimination

z Dispatcher of the past is the transportation planner of the 

future

z Afford even the smallest railroad greater safety and 

Professional Service 

z Class I partnership and greater efficiency on both sides

ARDC – Safety Driven; Designed for Safety Driven; Designed for 

Service Service

Testimonial Testimonial z General Manager of the New England Central, Mike Olmstead says “the 

dispatching service from the ARDC is as good as you will get on ANY 

CLASS ONE railroad. The ARDC’s training and efficiency testing programs 

are something that most other short lines would like to emulate, and this is 

clearly evident in their end product."

z General Manager of the Alabama Gulf Coast Railroad, Mike Brigham

says, “Centralizing the Dispatching function of the AGR in Vermont has 

provided a safer atmosphere for our train crews, our mechanical group and 

our maintenance of way crews. They are assured that track warrants are 

issued via computer which has a fail safe option built in and dispatchers 

issuing the warrant are knowledgeable in their field. By centralizing this 

function, it is under a true Dispatching Center and not with personnel who 

perform more daily functions than just Dispatching.”
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121

Ed Wendlandt

Commander, United States Coast Guard

United States 

Coast Guard

Overview

 Vessel Traffic Management

 History and Background of Vessel Traffic Services

 Responsibilities of a VTS operator

 Technology and training available to VTS Operator

 Work hours and schedule.

United States 

Coast Guard

Vessel Traffic Management  NAVRULES / COLREGS

 Ship’s Routing Measures

 Port Access Route Studies 

 TSS / Fairways

 Navigation Regulations

 IMO & IALA Membership

 Nav & VTS IALA Committees

 Equipment Carriage

 Bridge-to-Bridge Radio

 Navigation Equipment

 Radar, ARPA, GPS, AIS

 Vessel Traffic Services

 VTS’s and Cooperative Partnerships

 Ports & Waterways Safety Assessments

 Ports & Waterways Safety System
122

United States 

Coast Guard

Vessel Traffic Service

 The service should have the 

capability to interact with the traffic 

and to respond to traffic situations 

developing in the VTS area.” 

 IMO “GUIDELINES FOR VTS”

“...a service implemented by a Competent 

Authority, designed to improve the safety 

and efficiency of vessel traffic and to 

protect the environment. 

United States 

Coast Guard

United States 

Coast Guard
123

United States 

Coast Guard

United States 

Coast Guard

United States 

Coast Guard
124

United States 

Coast Guard

United States 

Coast Guard

San Francisco

Houston

Sault Ste. Marie

New York

Berwick

Bay

Lower 

Mississippi

River

Prince

William

Sound

Los Angeles

Puget Sound

Louisville*

Where the VTS operator works

United States 

Coast Guard
125

United States 

Coast Guard

15 Billion Gals Oil Moved

WSF moves over 26 million passengers 

& 11 million vehicles/year; 10 routes

1.8 Million containers thru 

Seattle & Tacoma-3rd largest

Growing cruise ship industry:

- 250k cruise ship passengers

- 125 visits CY’03; triple by ‘07

Alaskan Fishing Fleet Homeport

USN strategic port-3rd Largest

Major Military Outload port

~5000 deep Draft Ships per year

Puget Sound Port Complex

3500 square mile AOR

123 to 147 mile Transits

Large distance between Critical 

Infrastructure venues > 30 nm

Over 250,000 Vessel transits per year

United States 

Coast Guard

Ferry Routes

* Nations Largest System

* 520+ Transits per day

* 40 Transit per day with >500 passengers

* 26 million passengers per year

* 11 million vehicles per year

United States 

Coast Guard

Responsibilities of a VTS Operator

 Ensure safe, efficient movement of vessels in a 

prescribed area by creating good order and 

predictability

 Communicate with vessels over the radio

 Monitor vessel movements using sensor suite

 Respond to calls for assistance

 Collect, sort and analyze information for future use to 

make recommendations or direct ship movements
126

United States 

Coast Guard

Responsibilities of a VTS operator 

 Provide clear, concise, 

accurate, timely and 

purposeful information

 Provide Information

 Provide Navigation 

Assistance

 Traffic Organization

United States 

Coast Guard

Manual Board Tracking System

 Board/Card tracking 

system

 Each card represents 

vessel

 Each slot represents 

segment of waterway

 Used in case of 

catastrophic failure

United States 

Coast Guard

Technology Available to VTS Operator

 Vessel Transit Management Systems

 CGVTS

 MTM-200
127

United States 

Coast Guard

Radar Images on the Radar Images on the 

Integrated Display System Integrated Display System

United States 

Coast Guard

Technology Available to VTS Operator

United States 

Coast Guard

Technology Available to VTS Operator
128

United States 

Coast Guard

Technology Available to VTS Operator

 Remote Sensors

 Radar, VHF-FM radio, Camera, Automatic Identification System, Trip line

United States 

Coast Guard

Trip Line

 2 camera system

 Located on tower in area with sufficient time to stop

United States 

Coast Guard

 Sensor alerts Opcen-vessel at 132 ft (Orange)

 Sensor alerts Opcen-vessel at 135ft (Red)

 Video captures picture of vessel’s highest point
129

United States 

Coast Guard

Technology Available to VTS Operator

 PORTS - Physical Oceanographic Real-Time System

 Provides real-time information on height of tides and current 

speed and direction.

 Available on the internet. 

 Often relayed to Mariner.

 A factor in Vessel Movement decisions and directions.

United States 

Coast Guard

United States 

Coast Guard

Training

 Two Key Components – National and Local

 National VTS school 

 Certification course

 Provides history of program including authorities

 Teaches basic Vessel Traffic Management

 Employs state of the market simulators

 Used to ensure national policies are understood 

and carried forward in a standard manner
130

United States 

Coast Guard

Training (cont’d)

 Local Training provides

 Indoctrination to local port complex and vessel 

transit history

 "Knobology" - equipment operation training

 Ship Ride Program - form of outreach to local 

mariners who periodically carry VTS operators on 

transits of the Vessel Traffic Service Area

 Regulations

United States 

Coast Guard

Work Hours and Schedule

 Work hours and schedule.

 Varies by location –

 Most Common:

 12 hours on/12 hours off – 3 days on/3 days off

 With small adjustments allows 80 hours every 2 weeks

 Either all day shifts or all night shifts

 6 AM to 6 PM

 8 hour sliding shifts

 On Watch:

 1 hour on board then break with rotation

CDR Ed Wendlandt CDR Ed Wendlandt

ewendlandt ewendlandt@comdt.uscg.mil

2100 2nd Street SW Street SW

Washington, DC 20593 Washington, DC 20593

Websites: Websites:

U. S. Coast Guard: U. S. Coast Guard: 

http://www.uscg.mil http://www.uscg.mil

Vessel Traffic Services: Vessel Traffic Services:

http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/mwv/vts/vts_home.htm http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/mwv/vts/vts_home.htm

National Boating Safety: National Boating Safety:

http://www.uscgboating.org http://www.uscgboating.org

Thank you!
131

4006-1

Development of a Development of a

Dispatcher Dispatcher Taskload Taskload

Assessment Tool Assessment Tool

Stephen Reinach Stephen Reinach

Foster-Miller, Inc. Miller, Inc.

September 30, 2004 September 30, 2004

4006-2

Overview

 Background Background

 Methods Methods

 Results Results

 Discussion

4006-3

Background

 Dispatchers Dispatchers

• Shoulder more Shoulder more 

responsibilities than responsibilities than

ever before ever before

• Integral to rail safety Integral to rail safety
132

4006-4

Background

(continued) (continued)

 FRA system safety audits FRA system safety audits

• Found evidence of periodic work overloads Found evidence of periodic work overloads

• Collected data on dispatcher activities Collected data on dispatcher activities

• FRA felt method was imprecise FRA felt method was imprecise

 FRA Office of Research and Development FRA Office of Research and Development

dispatcher R&D program dispatcher R&D program

4006-5

Background

(continued) (continued)

 FRA Class I safety audit of dispatch center FRA Class I safety audit of dispatch center

• FRA developed dispatcher FRA developed dispatcher taskload taskload

assessment method assessment method

• Railroad-specific specific

• Time-consuming consuming

• Required numerous personnel Required numerous personnel

 No tool currently exists to reliably and quickly No tool currently exists to reliably and quickly 

measure dispatcher activity measure dispatcher activity

4006-6

Concept Concept

 Idea: Take original method developed by Idea: Take original method developed by

Office of Safety and... Office of Safety and...

• Make it widely applicable to railroads Make it widely applicable to railroads

• Make it quick, easy and unobtrusive Make it quick, easy and unobtrusive

to implement to implement

 Tool:

• Support future dispatcher research Support future dispatcher research

• Support internal railroad dispatcher desk studies Support internal railroad dispatcher desk studies

• Ensure even distribution of taskload across desks Ensure even distribution of taskload across desks

• Support FRA Office of Safety dispatch audits Support FRA Office of Safety dispatch audits
133

4006-7

Approach

 Step one: Step one:

• Identify comprehensive set of observable Identify comprehensive set of observable

dispatcher tasks dispatcher tasks

• Discern factors that affect dispatcher taskload Discern factors that affect dispatcher taskload

• Determine how data can be collected Determine how data can be collected

 Step two: Step two:

• Develop taskload calculation methodology Develop taskload calculation methodology

• Convert into portable software application Convert into portable software application

4006-8

Taskload

 Definition Definition: The average time demanded of a : The average time demanded of a 

dispatcher in carrying out all job dispatcher in carrying out all job-related tasks related tasks

at a particular desk, over a specified period at a particular desk, over a specified period

of time (e.g., one shift) of time (e.g., one shift)

• Time = common denominator Time = common denominator

• Allows for collection of different tasks at Allows for collection of different tasks at

different railroads different railroads

 Tasks

• Observable Observable

• Quantifiable Quantifiable

• Quick and unobtrusive to collect Quick and unobtrusive to collect

4006-9

Methods Methods

 Develop initial set of Develop initial set of

dispatcher tasks dispatcher tasks

 Develop and distribute Develop and distribute

two rounds of questionnaires two rounds of questionnaires 

to FRA, railroads and ATDA to FRA, railroads and ATDA

1. Expand upon Expand upon

initial tasks initial tasks

2. Identify data Identify data

collection methods collection methods
134

4006-10

Results Results

 Initial set of dispatcher tasks Initial set of dispatcher tasks

• Literature review Literature review

• SME input SME input

• Naturalistic observation Naturalistic observation

 Questionnaire #1: Questionnaire #1:

11 respondents 11 respondents

 Questionnaire #2: Questionnaire #2:

10 respondents 10 respondents

4006-11

Results Results

(continued) (continued)

 67 dispatcher tasks organized into six categories 67 dispatcher tasks organized into six categories

1. Actuation of signals, switches, blocking devices and bridge Actuation of signals, switches, blocking devices and bridge 

controls via CTC/CAD controls via CTC/CAD

2. Issuance and cancellation of dispatcher Issuance and cancellation of dispatcher-authorized authorized 

mandatory directives mandatory directives

3. Granting of other track Granting of other track-related permissions, protections related permissions, protections

and clearances (non and clearances (non-mandatory directives) mandatory directives)

4. Carrying out non Carrying out non-movement authority or non movement authority or nonpermission/protection/cl permission/protection/clearance communications earance communications

5. General record General record-keeping tasks keeping tasks

6. Review of reference materials Review of reference materials

4006-12

Relative Relative Time Required

to Route Track Vehicles to Route Track Vehicles

More Time 1 4 6 (55%) 6 (55%) 7 (64%) 7 (64%)

Equal Time Equal Time 6 (55%) 6 (55%) 5 (45%) 5 (45%) 3 2

Less Time Less Time 2 0 0 0

Hi-Rail 

Work Train Vehicle Vehicle

Local 

Freight Freight 

Train

Passenger/ Passenger/

Commuter Commuter 

Train
135

4006-13

Relative Relative Effort Required

to Route Track Vehicles to Route Track Vehicles

More Effort More Effort 2 5 (45%) 5 (45%) 7 (64%) 7 (64%) 9 (82%) 9 (82%)

Equal Effort Equal Effort 5 (45%) 5 (45%) 4 2 0

Less Effort 2 0 0 0

Hi-Rail 

Work Train Vehicle Vehicle

Local 

Freight Freight 

Train

Passenger/ Passenger/

Commuter Commuter 

Train

4006-14

Dispatcher Task Data Collection Methods Dispatcher Task Data Collection Methods

 CAD report CAD report

 Other computer report Other computer report

 Paper train sheet Paper train sheet

 Other paper record Other paper record

 Audio tape Audio tape

 Direct observation Direct observation

 Other

 Cannot be collected Cannot be collected

4006-15

Dispatcher Task Data Collection Methods Dispatcher Task Data Collection Methods

(continued) (continued)

 CAD report CAD report

• CAD/CTC activity (10) CAD/CTC activity (10)

• Mandatory directives (8) Mandatory directives (8)

• General record General record-keeping* (8) keeping* (8)

 Audio tape Audio tape

• Track-related permissions, protections and clearances (9) related permissions, protections and clearances (9)

 Direct observation Direct observation

• Non-movement authority and non movement authority and non 

permission/protection/clearance communications (9) permission/protection/clearance communications (9)

• General record General record-keeping* (8) keeping* (8)

• Review of reference material (6) Review of reference material (6)
136

4006-16

Median Level of Time, Effort and

Obtrusiveness to Collect Obtrusiveness to Collect Taskload Taskload Data

4

5.5

6

General 

Recordkeeping keeping

Obtrusiveness Obtrusiveness 3 3 4.5 6 4

Effort 4 4 6.5 7 3

Time 4 4 7 7 4

Review 

Reference Reference 

Materials

Other 

Communications cations

Track-related related 

Permissions, Permissions, 

Protections, Protections, 

Clearances

Mandatory 

Directives

CAD/CTC 

Activity Activity

4006-17

Percentage of Time Dispatchers Spend Percentage of Time Dispatchers Spend

on Each Task Category During a Typical Shift on Each Task Category During a Typical Shift

Review reference materials Review reference materials 3.9

General record General record-keeping keeping 10.9

Other communications Other communications 10.0

17.4 Track-related permissions, related permissions, 

protections, clearances protections, clearances

Mandatory directives Mandatory directives 28.5

CAD/CTC activity CAD/CTC activity 29.3

Task Avg Percentage of Time Avg Percentage of Time

4006-18

Discussion

Questionnaire Results Questionnaire Results

 67 observable dispatcher tasks were identified 67 observable dispatcher tasks were identified

and organized into six top and organized into six top-level task categories level task categories

 Not all trains are created equal Not all trains are created equal

 No one method is effective at collecting No one method is effective at collecting

data on all six dispatcher activities data on all six dispatcher activities
137

4006-19

Discussion (continued) Discussion (continued)

Questionnaire Results Questionnaire Results

 Data on track Data on track-related permissions, protections, related permissions, protections, 

clearances; other communications; and general clearances; other communications; and general 

record-keeping appear to be the most time keeping appear to be the most timeconsuming, effortful and obtrusive to collect consuming, effortful and obtrusive to collect

 Over 50 percent of a dispatcher’s work Over 50 percent of a dispatcher’s work-related time related time 

was estimated to be spent actuating signals and was estimated to be spent actuating signals and 

switches via CAD/CTC and issuing and canceling switches via CAD/CTC and issuing and canceling 

mandatory directives to track occupants mandatory directives to track occupants

4006-20

Discussion (continued) Discussion (continued)

Cognitive Nature of Dispatching Cognitive Nature of Dispatching

 Railroad dispatching is heavily cognitive in nature Railroad dispatching is heavily cognitive in nature

 Relationship between Relationship between observable taskload observable taskload and 

unobservable cognitive workload unobservable cognitive workload unknown unknown

 Development of a taskload assessment tool Development of a taskload assessment tool

based only on observable task activity may not be based only on observable task activity may not be

the most appropriate approach to characterizing the most appropriate approach to characterizing 

railroad dispatching railroad dispatching

4006-21

Discussion

Preliminary Model of Dispatcher Performance Preliminary Model of Dispatcher Performance

 Data on observable Data on observable 

dispatcher tasks can serve dispatcher tasks can serve 

as the building blocks to a as the building blocks to a 

preliminary model of preliminary model of 

dispatcher performance and dispatcher performance and 

safety that incorporates both safety that incorporates both 

the physical and cognitive the physical and cognitive 

aspects of a dispatcher’s job aspects of a dispatcher’s job
138

4006-22

Thank You! Thank You!
139

1

Understanding How Train Dispatchers 

Manage and Control Trains

Emilie M. Roth

Roth Cognitive Engineering

2

Changing Cognitive Landscape of 

U. S. Railroad Industry

 Advanced train control technology

 New display and communication technology

 Introduction of high-speed trains

 Changes in hiring practice

3

Examining Train Dispatching 

in Today’s Environment

Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA):

Examine how experienced dispatchers 

schedule trains and manage track use

Identify cognitive activities that could be 

more effectively supported

Identify features of existing environment that 

contribute to effective performance and 

should be preserved when transitioning to 

new technologies
140

4

Cognitive Task Analysis

The Domain Practitioner(s)

Time

Exploring the Current World

Understanding the way people operate

in their world

Understanding the way the world works

Exploring the Envisioned World

Growth of Understanding

CTA Representation

Prototype Representation

Design

Basis

CTA

Model Scratch

Goal: Understand/model complexities,

demands, variability, and complicating

factors

Techniques: Functional/Means-ends Analysis

Ethnographic / Observational investigations

Functional Task and Workflow Modeling

Structured Interview Techniques

Goal: Understand/model complexities,

demands, variability, and complicating

factors

Techniques: Functional/Means-ends Analysis

Ethnographic / Observational investigations

Functional Task and Workflow Modeling

Structured Interview Techniques

Goal: Understand/model expertise, knowledge,

strategies, and error

Techniques: Semantic Mapping

Ethnographic / Observational investigations

Critical Incident Technique

Critical Decision Method

Structured Interview Techniques

Goal: Understand/model expertise, knowledge,

strategies, and error

Techniques: Semantic Mapping

Ethnographic / Observational investigations

Critical Incident Technique

Critical Decision Method

Structured Interview Techniques

Copyright  1997, Carnegie Group, Inc.

Field of Practice

Discovering how to support the way the world

will work

Discovering support for how people

will operate in their world

5

CTA Approach

Iterative ‘bootstrap’ approach:

Preliminary field observations in a dispatch 

center:

3⁄4 multiple dispatchers

3⁄4 multiple shifts (including shift turn-overs)

 Structured Interviews

 Follow-up field observations

3⁄4 observations at a second dispatch center

3⁄4 additional observations at original center

6

Guiding Framework

 Identify and document:

3⁄4 Sources of task complexity

3⁄4 Skills and strategies that experienced practitioners 

have developed to cope with task demands 

3⁄4 Opportunities for performance improvement:

 training

 new technologies

 Look for:

3⁄4 Illustrative incidents 

3⁄4 Deviations from ‘canonical’
141

7

8

The Train Dispatching Environment

 Train dispatchers are responsible for:

3⁄4 Managing track use

3⁄4 Insuring that trains are routed safely and 

efficiently 

3⁄4 Insuring the safety of personnel working on and 

around railroad track 

 An example of a distributed planning task

3⁄4 Multiple train dispatchers handling adjoining 

territories

3⁄4 Train engineers

3⁄4 Maintenance of way workers

9

What Makes Train Dispatching Difficult?

Need to dynamically re-compute train 

routes and meets:

3⁄4 train delays and track outages

3⁄4 unplanned demands on track usage

 Need to satisfy multiple demands placed 

on track usage

High knowledge requirements and 

memory load

Heavy attention and communication 

demands (particularly over the radio)
142

10

Examples of Dispatcher Decisions

 How to route a train? 

 Where to have meets and passes?

 How long will it take a train to get from point A to point B?

 Which train to let through first?

 How to help a train make-up time?

 Whether there is enough time to give permission to MOW 

personnel to work on track?

 Whether there is enough time to allow another train 

through?

These decisions require extensive knowledge 

and skill built up from experience.

11

Expert Strategies for Coping with 

Task Demands

 Off-load memory requirements

 Anticipate and plan ahead

 Act proactively

 Level workload

12

Off-Loading Memory Requirements

(Compensating for Interface Limitations)

 Cheat Sheet:

3⁄4 inter-lockings and train stations and when 

the trains are scheduled to arrive

3⁄4 track sidings and corresponding mileposts

3⁄4 streets with crossing gates and 

corresponding mileposts

 Desk File:

3⁄4 supplemental bulletin orders in effect

3⁄4 temporary speed restrictions

3⁄4 handwritten notes alerting to problems and 

providing tips

 Personal street maps
143

13

Anticipating and Planning Ahead

 Maintain ‘Big Picture’/Monitor Activity Beyond Own 

Territory:

3⁄4 Wall Panel

3⁄4 Other dispatchers

3⁄4 PC to access Information Reservation and Ticket System

3⁄4 Radio Communication

 Plan cooperatively across dispatch territories

 Take advantage of the radio ‘party line’ feature:

3⁄4 Identify when a train has left a station

3⁄4 Identify equipment problems

3⁄4 Listen for/head off potential conflicts

3⁄4 Listen for mistakes

 Consider what can go wrong and plan for 

contingencies

14

Expert Dispatch Strategies

 Acting Proactively

3⁄4 Strategies to take advantage of windows of 

opportunity

3⁄4 Cooperative strategies between dispatchers and 

engineers

Leveling Workload

3⁄4 Clearing routes/setting blocks in anticipation of 

needs

3⁄4 Giving authorization for track usage ‘until further 

notice’

15

Summary: Insights from CTA

Dispatchers have developed a variety of 

strategies that:

3⁄4 smooth the way for trains to pass safety and 

efficiently

3⁄4 satisfy the multiple demands placed on track use

These strategies depend heavily on 

communication and coordination among 

individuals distributed across time and 

space
144

16

Implications of CTA Results for Improving

Train Dispatch Operations

 Advanced Displays and Decision Aids

 Introduction of Data Link Technology

 Improvements to Training

17

Advanced Displays and Decision Aids

Enhance ability to track train progress and 

anticipate delays: precise train location

Facilitate access to information affecting train 

routing and track usage decisions: 

3⁄4 Shift paper resources to electronic media

3⁄4 Provide visualizations of physical track and 

surrounding geography (Electronic track charts 

with street maps overlaid )

Provide train routing aids

18

Dispatcher Planning

Stringline 

display that 

supports both 

preliminary 

planning and 

reacting to 

unexpected 

events
145

19

Implications for Introduction of 

‘Data Link’ Technology

 CTA confirmed the need to off-load some radio 

channel communication and suggested opportunities 

for data link technology:

3⁄4 electronic transmission of movement authorization 

forms

3⁄4 track visualization displays to promote shared 

understanding of location information.

 Revealed the importance of preserving the 

‘broadcast/party-line’ characteristic for some types of 

communication.

3⁄4 Exploring ways to implement data link systems that 

have ‘broadcast’ capabilities.

20

Datalink Communications

Railroad Worker PDQ Screen

 Problem Statement

 Phase I

 Phase II

 Further steps

21

 The CTA revealed important cognitive skills that 

underlie expert dispatcher performance:

3⁄4 Maintain ‘Big Picture’/Monitor Activity Beyond Own 

Territory:

3⁄4 Plan cooperatively across dispatch territories

3⁄4 Take advantage of the radio ‘party line’ feature

3⁄4 Take advantage of windows of opportunity

3⁄4 Consider what can go wrong and plan for contingencies

3⁄4 manage workload

 Currently these skills are learned in apprenticeship 

mode 

 These cognitive skills can be more efficiently 

learned through practice on challenging scenarios 

in a dynamic simulator

Training
146

22

General Conclusions

This study provides an illustrative case of 

the potential value of CTA. 

 Can reveal the sources of task complexity

 Can reveal the knowledge and skills that underlie 

expert performance

 Can reveal opportunities to improve performance

 Can reveal features of the current environment that 

facilitate effective performance and should be 

preserved as new technologies are introduced.

23

References

 Roth, E. M., Malsch, N. and Multer, J. (2001). Understanding how train 

dispatchers manage and control trains: Results of a cognitive task 

analysis. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of 

Transportation/Federal Railroad Administration. (DOT/FRA/ORD01/02) Available online at: 

http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/Research/ord0102.pdf

 Wreathall, J. Roth, E., Bley, D. and Multer, J. (2003). Human Reliability 

Analysis in Support of Risk Assessment for Positive Train Control. 

U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, 

Office of Research and Development: Washington, D. C. 

(DOT/FRA/ORD-03/15) Available online at: 

http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/Research/ord0315.pdf
147

Appendix E. 

Bibliography of Dispatcher Research 

Aguirre, A., & J. Foret (1994). Irregularity of working hours in railway workers and types of 

complaints. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 65, 367-371. 

Davis, D. R. (1958). Human error in transport accidents. Ergonomics, 2, 24-33. 

Devoe, D.B. (1974). An Analysis of the Job of Railroad Train Dispatcher. (Report No. FRAPRD&D-74-37). Springfield, VA: National Technical Information Service. 

Edkins, G. D., & Pollock, C.M. (1997). The influence of sustained attention on railway 

accidents. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 29(4), 533-539. 

Federal Railroad Administration. (1990). National Train Dispatching Safety Assessment. 

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation. 

Federal Railroad Administration. (1995). National Train Dispatcher’s Follow-up Review.

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation. 

Gertler, J., & Acton, S. (2003). Railroad Dispatcher Communications Training Materials. 

(Report No. DOT/FRA/ORD-03/12). Springfield, VA: National Technical Information 

Service. 

Gertler, J. (2003). Selection of Railroad Dispatcher Candidates. (Report No. DOT/FRA/ORD03-09). Springfield, VA: National Technical Information Service. 

Gertler, J., & Nash, D. (2004). Optimizing Staffing Levels and Schedules for Railroad 

Dispatching Centers. (Report No. DOT/FRA/ORD-04/01). Springfield, VA: National 

Technical Information Service. 

Grant, J. S. (1971). Concepts of fatigue and vigilance in relation to railway operations. 

Ergonomics, 14(1), 111-118. 

Hak, A. &. Kampman, R. (1981). Working irregular hours: Complaints and state of fitness of 

railway personnel. In A. Reinberg, N. Vieux & P. Andlauer (Eds.) Night and Shift Work: 

Biological and Social Aspects (pp. 229-236). Rouen: Pergamon Press. 

Kolmodin-Hedman, B., & Swensson, A. (1975). Problems related to shift work: A field study of 

Swedish railroad workers with irregular work hours. Scandinavian Journal of Work, 

Environment and Health, 1, 254-262. 

Komaya, K., & Asuka, M. (2001). Rail traffic control under disrupted conditions. Control in 

Transportation Systems 2000: A Proceedings Volume from the 9th IFAC Symposium, 

Braunschweig, Germany, 13-15 June 2000. 

Kvist, T., Hellstrom, P., Sandclad, B., & Bystrom, J. (2002). Decision support in the train 

dispatching process. Eight International Conference on Computers in Railways VIII. 

Lemnos, Greece, 12-14 June 2002. 

Lambropoulos, T. (2002). Genetic algorithm application for the solution of the optimal 

dispatching problem. Eight International Conference on Computers in Railways VIII. 

Lemnos, Greece, 12-14 June 2002. 
148

Lauber, J. K. & Kayten, P. J. (1988). Sleepiness, circadian dysrhythmia, and fatigue in 

transportation system accidents. Sleep, 11(6), 503-512. 

Lenior, T. M. J. (1993). Analysis of cognitive processes in train traffic control. Ergonomics, 36

(11), 1361-1368. 

McCord, C.P. (1948). Life and death by the minute. Industrial Medicine. 17 (10), 377-382. 

Pickup, L., Wilson, J.R., & Clarke, T. Mental workload of the railway signaller. In Paul T. 

McCabe (ed) Contemporary Ergonomics 2003. Proceedings from the Ergonomics Society 

Conference. Edinburgh: Taylor & Francis, 397-402, 2003. 

Popkin, S., Gertler, J., & Reinach, S. (2001). A Preliminary Examination of Railroad Dispatcher 

Workload, Stress, and Fatigue. (Report No. DOT/FRA/ORD-01-08). Springfield, VA: 

National Technical Information Service. 

Reinach, S., Gertler, J., & Kuehn, G. (1998). Training Requirements for Railroad Dispatchers: 

Objectives, Syllabi, and Test Design. (Report No. DOT/FRA/ORD-98-08). Springfield, VA: 

National Technical Information Service. 

Rondon, M., & Gomide, F. (2001). Line block analysis in railway dispatch and simulation 

systems. Control in Transportation Systems 2000: A Proceedings Volume from the 9th IFAC 

Symposium, Braunschweig, Germany, 13-15 June 2000. 

Roth, E., Malsch, N., & Multer, J. (2001). Understanding How Train Dispatchers Manage and 

Control Trains: Results of a Cognitive Task Analysis. (Report No. DOT/FRA/ORD-01/02). 

Springfield, VA: National Technical Information Service. 

Sandblad, B., Andersson, A., Jonsson, K. E., Hellstrom, P., Lindstrom, P., Rudolf, J., Storck, J., 

& Wahlborg, M. (2000). A train traffic operation and planning simulator. Seventh 

International Conference on Computers in Railways. Computers in Railways VII. Bologna, 

Italy 11-13 September 2000. 

Skjerve, A. B., Ludvigsen, J., & Neset, T. (2002) Identification of qualifications for traindispatcher trainees. Halden, Norway: Institute for Energy Technology. 

Vanderhorst, J. (1990). A comparison of voice and data link communication: Railroad 

dispatcher’s perspective. (Report No. PB91-130021INZ). Springfield, VA: National 

Technical Information Service. 
149

Abbreviations 

ARDC American Rail Dispatching Center 

BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway 

CAD computer-aided dispatching 

COLREG collision regulations 

CTA cognitive task analysis 

CTC centralized traffic control 

FRA Federal Railroad Administration 

GCOR General Code of Operating Rules 

GPS global positioning system 

HDC Harriman Dispatching Center 

HR Human Resources 

ICE Inter City Express 

IHB Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad 

IMO International Maritime Organization 

ISO International Standards Organization 

KSAO knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics 

mTAWL modified task analysis workload 

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 

OCC Operations Control Center 

OJT on-the-job training 

P&W Portland & Western Railroad 

PAQ Position Analysis Questionnaire 

PTC positive train control 

RSAC Railroad Safety Advisory Committee 

RTC rail traffic controller 

SACP Safety Assurance and Compliance Program 

TGV Train à Grande Vitesse 

TOC train operating company 

TWC track warrant control 
150

UP Union Pacific Railroad 

VTS Vessel Traffic Services 
151

Glossary 

adverse impact: A substantially different rate of selection in hiring, promotion, or other 

employment decision, which works to the disadvantage of members of a race, sex, or ethnic 

group. (29 C.F.R. §1607.16, Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures) 

cognitive task analysis: A set of methods used to understand the mental processes and strategies 

of operators in carrying out job-related tasks to achieve a work-related goal. 

job analysis: A set of methods to identify and prioritize job duties and the requirements 

necessary to complete these duties. 

PAQ: The PAQ is a systematic methodology for conducting a job analysis. 

realistic job preview: An approach used in the employee selection process to give a job 

applicant a clear, unambiguous depiction of the job, including its requirements, demands, and 

organizational culture. 

task analysis: A set of techniques and methodologies to identify or break down operator 

requirements to accomplish a work-related goal. Requirements are often defined in terms of 

actions and processes. 

taskload: A measure of work burden, typically measured through the identification and 

quantification of various work tasks and activities. 

workload: A measurement of an individual’s ability to manage tasks and activities. Workload is 

usually distinguished from taskload in that two individuals with different amounts of training or 

experience, for example, may manage the same exact set of tasks in a completely different 

manner.