  |
|
TESTIMONIESTestimony - Arthur L. YeagerClick here to download this document (PDF) Seat Belts for School Buses - The New Jersey Experience Testimony of Arthur L. Yeager, DMD March 1, 1999 I would like to thank the Committee for consideration of this measure to require the installation of seat belts on Connecticut school buses and thereby improve the safety of the children who ride back and forth to school on these vehicles. It should be obvious that if during motor vehicle crashes, seat belts save lives and reduce the severity of injuries suffered, their installation and use should be required on school buses. Harm is done when crash forces propel occupants out of their seats and into hostile areas or eject them partially or entirely from the vehicle. Car occupants are safer when belted because restraints keep them in their seats. The same things happen on school buses. In spite of the insistence of those opposed to seat belts on school buses, the laws of physics are not repealed because the passengers are children and the vehicle is a school bus. As happened in New Jersey, you will be told that Connecticut children do not need seat belts on school buses because they are protected by "compartmentalization7'. The story goes that being seated between padded seats is sufficient protection from crash forces. After one look at school bus seats, you do not have to be an automotive engineer to understand that this so called 4c compartment" is tragically deficient because it offers absolutely no protection to the young passengers if the crash impact is from the side and children are propelled across the bus. If the school bus should rollover, passengers are tossed as if they were in a concrete mixer. Seat belts are needed to keep the kids in the "compartment". In New Jersey we have learned that when children are using their seat belts that discipline on the school bus is substantially enhanced. Drivers report that they are better able to concentrate on their driving when belts are in use. Since driver distraction leads to accidents, New Jersey buses are safer when the children ride restrained. We are also pleased that in New Jersey our children do not get a mixed message regarding auto safety. From the first ride home from the hospital in an infant carrier, to toddler car and booster seats as they grow and finally to seat belts, parents have educated their children to ride safely. It is ironic that Connecticut children often take their very first ride unrestrained as they start kindergarten and get on the school bus for their first trip to school. Unfortunately, they are then "uneducated", the five year olds being told that belts are not needed. You will be told that the safest form of transportation is the school bus. That school buses are four times safer than the family car. But you are not told that four times as many automotive fatalities take place at night than during the day, and twice as many are killed on Saturday as on weekdays and more are killed in July and in August than in any other month in the year. Since there is usually no school transportation at night, or on Saturdays or during July and August, a proper comparison would probably disclose that the school bus is less safe than the family car. This is in spite of the school bus's obvious advantages of size, distinctive coloration, and the flashing lights. In spite of these protective features, in the United States, the 350,000 yellow school buses are involved in an astonishing 50,000 accidents per year. During our efforts to require installation of safety restraints on New Jersey's school buses one of our most articulate opponents was Linda Yenzer who had been State Director of Pupil Transportation and was at the time transportation supervisor of a I 00 bus fleet for a Regional District in Flemington. From the September 1998 issue of School Bus Fleet listen to what Ms. Yenzer and Mr. Bill McAdams of the Walton new York District have to say now. Linda Yenzer, transportation director at Hunterdon/Flemington-Raritan Regional District in Flemington, N.J., has visited the seat belt controversy from both sides of the aisle. She was a staunch opponent of seat belts when they were considered in the early 1990s in New Jersey. "I would have never willingly voted for them," she says. But in 1993, Yenzer had no choice. New Jersey officials had mandated that all new buses had to be equipped with lap belts. Despite misgivings about the decision, she trained her drivers and students on the seat belt policies and procedures. And, surprisingly, she hasn't experienced many problems. "All the negatives just don't exist," Yenzer says. "I did not expect what I got, at all." Vandalism of the equipment has been rare. "If we have IO belts per year that have to be replaced or repaired, that's a lot," Yenzer says. She adds, however, that discipline problems aboard her approximately I 00 buses are few and that other districts, especially in more urban areas, could experience something quite different. Another common concern is getting the passengers to actually wear the belts. Yenzer coaches her drivers to remind every student to buckle up every day. Occasionally, the restraints are used as a behavior management tool. Drivers who are having problems with a particular child are encouraged to require him or her to put on the seat belt. "They can use this thing to their advantage," Yenzer says. In New York, the only state other than New Jersey to mandate seat belts on large buses, the concerns about use - or abuse - of the restraints are similar. But one transportation supervisor, Bill McAdams of Walton School District, has reached the same conclusions as his New Jersey peer. McAdams says student behavior has changed since his district starting putting belts on its buses back in 1986. "It's changed in our favor," he says. 'It's cut down on kids getting up and wandering around the bus. At first there was some resistance from the drivers, but they've gotten to the point where they think they're all right." Nor has McAdams seen much vandalism of the belts, though he's heard reports to the contrary from several other transportation supervisors. "In the last three years, I'd say we've had three seat belts damaged," McAdams says. He believes that this lack of vandalism could be attributed to the district's policy that the children wear the belts. "The belts are around them," he says. "They're not just dangling." Like Yenzer, McAdams was leery of the mandate for seat belts. "I was against them from the beginning, but I've learned to live with them," he says. "I anticipated, just like the drivers, that the kids would whack each other with the belt buckles. It just didn't materialize." Both Yenzer and McAdams had the same reservations as you are hearing from transportation officials here. According to Yenzer, "Those negatives just don't exist." Of McAdams fear, "It just didn't materialize". In the real world, when the seat belt law was passed and implemented they discovered that their negative speculative concerns failed to materialize and the advantages of seat belts on school busses became apparent. Since 1967, when school bus crash tests were performed at UCLA, we have known that the use of seat belts would add substantial additional protection when used with high back padded seats. Please report out this important safety measure. Arthur L. Yeager, DMD
|
|
