What you are saying in effect is that notwithstanding the actual capabilities of two people, one who may have an amputation and the other may not, that it follows ipso facto that a person with the amputation is less capable than the person without the amputation? Mr. NEELY. Well, that inference certainly could be drawn from the testimony. I think, however, that in an explanation of that in the bus industry the duty or the work of the driver is governed entirely by seniority. He can bid certain jobs as he gets older. In the bus industry basically we have three different models of buses at the present time. But this is standard because any driver may get any bus at any particular moment. In other words, the equipment is not tied in necessarily to the driver. The equipment, and this is one of the basic principles that bus transportation has been successful on, is that we have so many buses and if they are qualified to go anyplace and the drivers are qualified to go anyplace, that the public demands transportation to, we can take care of them because we have always worked on the premise that we try to take care of all the people who present themselves for any particular schedule. Anything that would diminish that flexibility of either the equipment or the utilization of drivers in turn would make for additional problems. This is not like you can assign a man to drive between point A and B with the same bus every time because the industry does not function that way. Our problem, of course, is to get utilization of equip ment. Mr. WILLIAMS. If you will excuse me, I do not think that poses too great a problem with respect to this legislation because of the fact, as I would contemplate the legislation, it would permit the ICC to prescribe rules and circumscribe the type of equipment that could be operated by any individual. So as to the seniority aspects, while he might be entitled to it as a company policy or under some type of union agreement when he moved from one type of equipment to another, the ICC regulations might prohibit him from operating the other type of equipment. We will now hear from Mr. B. A. Rennolds, who will present a statement on behalf of the National Association of Motor Bus Owners. STATEMENT OF B. A. RENNOLDS, VICE PRESIDENT, VIRGINIA STAGE LINES, ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MOTOR BUS OWNERS Mr. RENNOLDS. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is B. A. Rennolds and I am vice president for operations, Virginia Stage Lines, Charlottesville, Va. My company is a member of the National Association of Motor Bus Owners which has been described by the previous witness. Virginia Stage Lines is also a member of the National Trailways Bus System, an association of nearly 50 companies operating coast to coast. I am also authorized to speak for the latter organization in this hearing. I have been associated with the intercity bus industry for 27 years, during 15 of which I was director of safety for my company. As operating vice president, safety of operations constitutes an important portion of my responsibilities. As Mr. Neely has pointed out, we earnestly support the objective of employing increasing proportions of handicapped workers, but we feel equally strongly that we cannot risk the safety and welfare of our passengers by employing them as intercity bus drivers. As the members of this committee know, the modern intercity coach is a relatively heavy vehicle with complex characteristics. Many of the operations are over modern expressways on which all traffic moves at comparatively high speeds. To operate under these conditions, top physical condition is essential, and we are convinced that a driver, equipped with a prosthetic device, is inevitably subject to some increase in reaction time whenever the limb or member so fitted is involved. For a number of reasons, this is extremely important. Our coaches are equipped with power steering which is very sensitive to slight movements. Full use of both feet and legs is necessary since we do not use automatic transmissions. The left foot is required for use of the air-assisted clutch and the right foot for accelerator and air-brake control. Almost constant use of these controls is required while driving in congested areas. Numerous other controls have to be manipulated with great frequency such as headlight dimmers, turn signals, inside lights, ventilation, and air-conditioning controls. Particularly in the case of the very sensitive devices that govern operations of the vehicle, a sense of "feel" or "touch" is vital and, of course, is absent in any member fitted with a prosthetic device. For example, instantaneous and absolutely accurate steering response is essential in the case of a front-tire failure, and delay of the smallest fraction of a second could be catastrophic. Any abrupt movement of clutch, accelerator or airbrake pedal could readily result in injuries to passengers, some of whom might be in the aisle on their way to or from the restroom. It should also be noted that these operations must continue under all sorts of varying highway, terrain, and weather conditions. In addition to actual operation of the vehicle, drivers are required to load and unload baggage and express packages up to 100 pounds, assist or even carry disabled passengers (particularly in the event of an accident or other emergency), cope with disorderly passengers, make minor repairs to the coach, apply or remove heavy chains, and change tires weighing 200 pounds or more. Frequent movement by the driver in and out of the coach is also necessary on many runs where substantial volumes of package express and mail are picked up or deposited. It is our firm conviction that the performance of these tasks requires the unimpaired use of all physical characteristics, and especially so in the case of an emergency such as an accident or a fire. We have not overlooked the improvements that have been made in the design and manufacture of prosthetic devices. As already noted, they nevertheless still lack the ability to permit rapid reflex reaction and the sense of feel or touch essential to safe operation of a coach with its human cargo; nor is any prosthetic device completely infallible. Further, the driver of an intercity coach is, in most cases, the entire crew, and he must be able to cope with all types of situations often many miles from any supervisor or other company employee or even any outside assistance at all. Failure of a prosthetic device under such conditions would be extremely serious. We therefore earnestly urge the subcommittee not to report this measure favorably and, in any event, not to make any relaxation of the present regulations applicable to motor carriers of passengers. We appreciate this opportunity to present our views and, as Mr. Neely has indicated, will be glad to respond to your questions. Mr. WILLIAMS. The committee appreciates receiving your statement, Mr. Rennolds, and wishes to thank you for your appearance. Mr. RENNOLDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. WILLIAMS. The bells have already rung, so the committee will stand in recess. (The following material was submitted for the record:) THE PRESIDENT'S COMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT OF THE HANDICAPPED, Hon. JOHN BELL WILLIAMS, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN WILLIAMS: I appreciate this opportunity to express my views and the views of the President's Committee on H.R. 827. The Executive Committee of the President's Committee has endorsed the principles underlying H.R. 827, and we urge its speedy enactment. It may be possible that specific details are in need of refinement, but these in no way lessen the need for this measure. At present, the Interstate Commerce Commission will not permit handicapped persons to operate commercial motor vehicles in interstate commerce, regard less of their individual qualifications. This, as we see it, is in violation of one of the most basic principles of the President's Committee, which we have been striving to further for the past decade and a half-that every applicant for employment have the right to be considered on his own merits as an individual, and not be deprived of consideration merely because of the fact of his handicap. We have made progress in furthering this philosophy over the years but our progress has not extended to the Interstate Commerce Commission. There, the very fact of a handicap is sufficient, per se, to deprive the applicant of consideration for employment. This rigid principle of inequality is hardly in keeping with our times, which have seen an extension of opportunity for the handicapped, rather than a contraction. Further, this rigid principle of inequality, if extended in its logical direction, could result in a general negation of much of the progress achieved over the years. If amputees and the deaf are to be deprived of the opportunity to qualify as drivers in interstate commerce merely because they happen to be amputees or deaf, why shouldn't they also be deprived of the opportunity to work in other fields of endeavor? If the amputees and the deaf are to be deprived, why not persons with other types of disabilities? Where does this stop? The circle of inequality could widen extensively, were the ICC philosophy to gain widespread acceptance. We do not ask that the ICC suddenly throw open its doors and give top priority to all the amputees and all the deaf. We do ask that the ICC take into consideration the appreciable advances made over recent years in quick-to-respond prosthetic appliances for the handicapped and in fingertip special controls for motor vehicles. We do ask that the ICC take cognizance of the fine records handicapped drivers have made in intrastate commerce-records that easily could stretch across State lines, were the ICC willing. We do ask that the ICC begin to evaluate human beings as human beings, and not as outmoded stereotypes wearing tags, "amputee," "deaf." We do ask that the ICC-as well as all Government agencies and all private industry-evaluate individuals as individuals, and not bar them merely because of handicaps. The ICC no longer can afford to ignore this trend toward equality, any more than it can afford to ignore the advances of modern sicence in making it feasible for the handicapped to drive safely. The really dangerous result of its static policy is that it has served as a model for States and local bodies which frequently pick up Federal rules and incorporate them into their own regulations. Thus a basic error is perpetuated and snowballed. The President's Committee firmly believes the cause of employment equality for the handicapped would be served by passage of H.R. 827. Cordially, Re House bill H.R. 827. MR. OREN HARRIS, MELVIN J. MAAS, Chairman. MAY 13, 1963. Chairman, House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, SIR: It is my understanding that the Subcommittee on Transportation and Aeronautics of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce will hold hearings to begin on May 14, 1963, on H.R. 827 which proposes to relax the present requirements of the Interstate Commerce Commission governing the minimum physical requirements of drivers in interstate commerce. These changes are of vital importance to the safety of the general driving public and to the welfare of the trucking industry. The bill as it now reads would require trucking companies operating in interstate commerce to hire as drivers those individuals who have suffered the loss of a hand, arm, leg, or hearing. As the safety director of an interstate motor carrier, and as a private individual, I must firmly protest this proposed legislation. The accident, fatality, and injury rates in the United States are growing daily. The efforts of truck safety men, highway safety and police organizations, and organizations such as the National Safety Council and the AAA, are constantly directed toward the reduction in the number of accidents on our highways. If this bill is passed and trucking companies are required to turn over big equipment to individuals who must rely upon the mechanical function of various contraptions to control their vehicles, many more thousands of innocent people will be killed and maimed. I plead and pray that every member of the subcommittee and the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce will carefully consider the hard facts that will be presented to the committee by the Interstate Commerce Commission Section of Safety and private safety organizations, and not be swayed by the pressure groups representing the handicapped. There are many, many positions available in the trucking industry alone for the handicapped and we hire the handicapped in the company I represent, but we do not and could not turn over to these individuals the power to kill. Over-the-road equipment in interstate commerce today is by necessity big and heavy and designed to haul many tons at high speeds. Tragic accidents occur even though the drivers of this equipment are physically fit and fully equipped with all their appendages and hearing. Therefore, I ask you how, in the name of commonsense, Congress hopes to help the handicapped by allowing the one-armed, one-legged, or totally deaf individual to drive a vehicle, through which means thousands more will become handicapped? In my opinion the energies of your committee and those of the various subcommittees should be directed toward assisting rather than hampering the Interstate Commerce Commission's Section of Safety and the trucking industry in their efforts to tighten up on the minimum physical requirements truck drivers must now meet under the motor carrier safety regulations. Very truly yours, PHILIP W. YOUNG. (Whereupon, at 12:40 p.m., the subcommittee recessed.) |