Bus hanging over CBE...

[+Young+]

1 hour ago, Lex said:

Refusing to take the MTA-mandated test may result in quicker dismissal. (That's just basic logic.)

Although I agree with you, from watching the following Press Conference below, which is only 10 minutes compared to the board meetings which take over an hour, one of the things which was mentioned is that the Bus Operator had a "broken jaw." Therefore, if the Bus Operator had a "broken jaw," how come they were "quick" to say that the Bus Operator refused to take a drug (urine) test, since he/she was probably not able to consume any water?

I'm not a Doctor or a Physician or anything to that nature, however if someone can clarify this for me, I would appreciate it. From my perspective, this is a "red flag" in itself, however that's just me.

 

[MHV9218]

3 minutes ago, +Young+ said:

Although I agree with you, from watching the following Press Conference below, which is only 10 minutes compared to the board meetings which take over an hour, one of the things which was mentioned is that the Bus Operator had a "broken jaw." Therefore, if the Bus Operator had a "broken jaw," how come they were "quick" to say that the Bus Operator refused to take a drug (urine) test, since he/she was probably not able to consume any water?

I'm not a Doctor or a Physician or anything to that nature, however if someone can clarify this for me, I would appreciate it. From my perspective, this is a "red flag" in itself, however that's just me.

Dunno, I like to defend the op too, but that doesn't make any sense to me. You can pee in a cup without gulping a bottle of water first. Especially a B/O, who 9 times out of 10 wishes he were closer to a bathroom and ready to take his relief...

[paulrivera]

And it’s starting to appear the bus didn’t have any obvious mechanical issues.

This along with the B/O apparently on his last round trip of his shift: Looks like he had that “last trip itch” to go back home and the MTA is gonna look to hang him.

[Deucey]

16 minutes ago, +Young+ said:

Therefore, if the Bus Operator had a "broken jaw," how come they were "quick" to say that the Bus Operator refused to take a drug (urine) test, since he/she was probably not able to consume any water?

I'm not a Doctor or a Physician or anything to that nature, however if someone can clarify this for me, I would appreciate it. From my perspective, this is a "red flag" in itself, however that's just me.

Assuming that after taking a header onto the freeway and a broken jaw, he could’ve actually been in shock and possibly concussed - even though he aided passengers in exiting the vehicle.

And most likely when he was transported to hospital they did blood draws there - which are more accurate than field sobriety tests. 

[QM1to6Ave]

1 hour ago, +Young+ said:

Although I agree with you, from watching the following Press Conference below, which is only 10 minutes compared to the board meetings which take over an hour, one of the things which was mentioned is that the Bus Operator had a "broken jaw." Therefore, if the Bus Operator had a "broken jaw," how come they were "quick" to say that the Bus Operator refused to take a drug (urine) test, since he/she was probably not able to consume any water?

I'm not a Doctor or a Physician or anything to that nature, however if someone can clarify this for me, I would appreciate it. From my perspective, this is a "red flag" in itself, however that's just me.

 

Like @Deuceymentioned, drug screens can be done via blood draw. The fact that he refused is not that surprising to me, even if he knew if would come back negative because a lot of people worry about false positives. Plus, the most likely factor based on the data presented here (tiredness plus rushing to get back to the depot) wouldn't show up on a drug screen anyway.  

[QM1to6Ave]

It's really amazing that the B/O didn't die from the fall. It's also pretty cool that they were able to recover the bus without it splitting into two parts, based on that video. 

[Deucey]

26 minutes ago, QM1to6Ave said:

It's really amazing that the B/O didn't die from the fall.

Seatbelts save lives.

[MHV9218]

13 minutes ago, Deucey said:

Seatbelts save lives.

Which brings me to my question – how the hell did the 8 passengers not get killed? 50 foot fall, that's like 15m, you figure gravity has them falling for at least 1-2 seconds, or even longer if the trailer/accordion held it in place. Either the passengers were all in the rear trailer section, or they held on reallllly tight.

[Deucey]

7 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Which brings me to my question – how the hell did the 8 passengers not get killed? 50 foot fall, that's like 15m, you figure gravity has them falling for at least 1-2 seconds, or even longer if the trailer/accordion held it in place. Either the passengers were all in the rear trailer section, or they held on reallllly tight.

If they were seated, they would’ve had time to brace themselves on the seat backs. And the seats are positioned so close together that one could be wedged in place by knees touching the seat backs.

Dunno how school buses are out here, but in Cali all but the oldest buses had these high seat backs (I’m 6’1, and these seat backs were the same height as my armpits) instead of seatbelts since if there was a collision or fall, the seat back would stop forward motion. I think the same principle applies in how metro buses do seat layout.

[40MntVrn]

I wouldn't take the test either, honestly. The PR front of "conducting a quick investigation" can easily switch to culpability. But this is coming from my paranoid ass.

[Deucey]

19 minutes ago, 40MntVrn said:

I wouldn't take the test either, honestly. The PR front of "conducting a quick investigation" can easily switch to culpability. But this is coming from my paranoid ass.

You’d be an excellent Union Rep/Shop Steward and/or defense attorney.

Cuz some folks are stooooo-pid. Innocence =/= non-culpability

[Q23 via 108]

Theoretically speaking, this could've been a whole lot worse if it was a 40 footer. Could you imagine if a 40 footer to the plunge below and all of the bus took impact. The fact that this was an Artic was probably the best case scenario for this type of crash b/c atleast the back side didn't topple over and kept the rest of the bus from sliding down. But if that was C40LF and it had the same fate, who's not to say it takes a nosedive and then on the rebound the back portion of the bus falls and then burst into flames on impact. Might even explode due to the distance of that fall. Definitely the worst bus crash I've ever seen, but might have been the best case scenario in the case of this type of accident. 

[Missabassie]

Just turned on the news to see this, Wowsers. According to reporters, everyone's out ok. 

Leave it to the shitty Bronx....

[R10 2952]

19 minutes ago, Missabassie said:

Leave it to the shitty Bronx....

Bruh, it's not that deep.

Edited January 16, 2021 by R10 2952

[RailBus63]

14 hours ago, 40MntVrn said:

I wouldn't take the test either, honestly. The PR front of "conducting a quick investigation" can easily switch to culpability. But this is coming from my paranoid ass.

Did he have a right to refuse?  

[SoSpectacular]

4 hours ago, RailBus63 said:

Did he have a right to refuse?  

 

You have the right to refuse but it also gives you a sure-shot chance at being shown the door... Fortunately Transit has only given the driver days in the street until they can get an explanation/investigation done

[Abigail684]

The driver of the MTA bus that plunged 50 feet off a highway overpass in the Bronx Thursday night has been withheld from service without pay after refusing to take a drug and alcohol test after arrival at the hospital, MTA officials say. The driver, an 11-year NYC transit veteran with a clean service record prior to this incident injured his jaw during the incident, during FDNY and NYPD first-responders say he helped passengers evacuate the bus. Officials say that he passed a breathalyzer test at the scene of the crash. MTA officials say that at around 11:05 p.m. Thursday, a BX35 bus was traveling Northbound on University Avenue at a speed between 17 and 26 miles per hour when it turned onto a ramp leading to the Cross Bronx Expressway. The bus passed the ramp by approximately 10 feet and crashed through the guard rail. The articulated bus (made of two sections and connected by a flexible joint) was left dangling 50-feet above the roadway below. MTA officials say that the bus would have had to be moving between 3 and 5 mph to safely make the turn. At least eight passengers were injured in the crash. The bus was last inspected on Wednesday, January 13th when it was found that it had no mechanical issues. The MTA is continuing its investigation into the cause of the incident.

 

Edited January 16, 2021 by Abigail684

[MHV9218]

5 hours ago, RailBus63 said:

Did he have a right to refuse?  

As SoSpectacular said, you can do whatever you'd like, but it's a guaranteed way to tilt the entire investigation against you. Even if you are entirely clean, the worst thing to do is raise the specter of doubt among the TA or PD investigators, who are just looking for a good reason to nail you. Any resistance or lack of cooperation is reason for them to give you a hard time, and unless you have deep pockets for a lawyer, I'm not so sure it's a good idea.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

31 minutes ago, Abigail684 said:

The driver of the MTA bus that plunged 50 feet off a highway overpass in the Bronx Thursday night has been withheld from service without pay after refusing to take a drug and alcohol test after arrival at the hospital, MTA officials say. The driver, an 11-year NYC transit veteran with a clean service record prior to this incident injured his jaw during the incident, during FDNY and NYPD first-responders say he helped passengers evacuate the bus. Officials say that he passed a breathalyzer test at the scene of the crash. MTA officials say that at around 11:05 p.m. Thursday, a BX35 bus was traveling Northbound on University Avenue at a speed between 17 and 26 miles per hour when it turned onto a ramp leading to the Cross Bronx Expressway. The bus passed the ramp by approximately 10 feet and crashed through the guard rail. The articulated bus (made of two sections and connected by a flexible joint) was left dangling 50-feet above the roadway below. MTA officials say that the bus would have had to be moving between 3 and 5 mph to safely make the turn. At least eight passengers were injured in the crash. The bus was last inspected on Wednesday, January 13th when it was found that it had no mechanical issues. The MTA is continuing its investigation into the cause of the incident.

 

Please list the source when you post quotes from news sources.

[Abigail684]

14 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Please list the source when you post quotes from news sources.

I got it from the Citizen App.                                                                                

[Abigail684]

A veteran MTA bus driver was yanked off the job Saturday for refusing to take mandatory drug and alcohol tests after the wild late-night wreck where his vehicle plunged 50 feet from an overpass onto the Cross Bronx Expressway, transit officials said.

Driver Everton Beccan, 55, was officially ordered “withheld from service without pay” after the Thursday night crash where the Bronx bus with seven passengers aboard went front-end first off the overpass. The rear of the articulated bus remained precariously on the overpass above.

“Refusal to take a drug test in this situation is grounds for immediate termination, but he has a right to due process,” an MTA official said Saturday. “This is just the beginning of that process.”

MTA bus driver Everton Beccan, pictured, was officially ordered “withheld from service without pay” after the Thursday night crash where a Bronx bus with seven passengers aboard went front-end first off an overpass.
Beccan passed a breath test for alcohol at the scene of the University Ave. crash in Highbridge, but then declined a second test for drugs and alcohol when taken to a local hospital, authorities said.

 

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-nyc-bus-driver-pulled-off-job-overpass-crash-20210116-7ooss7c6izb55ia22n6hn2elw4-story.html

[Deucey]

7 minutes ago, Abigail684 said:

I got it from the Citizen App.                                                                                

Citizen App is only good for video. Any details of the aftermath of an incident needs to come from a reputable and mainstream news source or trade periodical.

[Deucey]

47 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

As SoSpectacular said, you can do whatever you'd like, but it's a guaranteed way to tilt the entire investigation against you. Even if you are entirely clean, the worst thing to do is raise the specter of doubt among the TA or PD investigators, who are just looking for a good reason to nail you. Any resistance or lack of cooperation is reason for them to give you a hard time, and unless you have deep pockets for a lawyer, I'm not so sure it's a good idea.

I'm just thinking about all the folks who cooperated with an investigation and did nothing wrong, made an honest mistake, or were victims of circumstance who lost jobs or got convicted.

Especially those who've been exonerated after wrongful convictions after "cooperating".

Any good lawyer or union rep/steward will tell you do only what's legally or contractually required at the end of the prescribed timeframe so the established facts are based on the investigation of the incident and assumptions about you and not based on the investigation of your facts and the incident.

Because assumptions can be and are wrong.

It's like an HR friend told me at my first post-college job: HR and investigators are there to protect the company and not to protect you.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

16 minutes ago, Deucey said:

I'm just thinking about all the folks who cooperated with an investigation and did nothing wrong, made an honest mistake, or were victims of circumstance who lost jobs or got convicted.

Especially those who've been exonerated after wrongful convictions after "cooperating".

Any good lawyer or union rep/steward will tell you do only what's legally or contractually required at the end of the prescribed timeframe so the established facts are based on the investigation of the incident and assumptions about you and not based on the investigation of your facts and the incident.

Because assumptions can be and are wrong.

It's like an HR friend told me at my first post-college job: HR and investigators are there to protect the company and not to protect you.

I find it strange that he wouldn't consent to a drug test. What exactly is he losing by agreeing to one if he is clean? 

[Deucey]

45 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I find it strange that he wouldn't consent to a drug test. What exactly is he losing by agreeing to one if he is clean? 

Three scenarios come to mind:

1) Secondhand inhalation from bus patrons who did smoke something before getting on

2) That Seinfeld where Elaine ate a poppyseed muffin and was positive for opium

3) He had some Motrin or a caffeine pill like Vivarin in his system. Motrin could cause a med record search and find a diagnosis of an undisclosed condition causing pain that could fail or cause concerns on a DOT physical; if the caffeine pills was wearing off, could cause them to question his alertness and start checking to see if he had some DOT-concerned sleep disorder.

If I'm him, I'm declining everything so they don't have a chance to do to me what was done with those MNRR motormen.

I'd rather get the lesser penalty from excessive speed and possibly be reassigned and keep my CDL - based on my record - and be able to go drive elsewhere if I'm terminated than have a full health and fitness investigation and lose my CDL cuz they found "something" and drew conclusions.

Edited January 16, 2021 by Deucey