Let's Connect
Follow Us
Watch Us
(+385) 1 2380 262
journal.prometfpz.unizg.hr
Promet - Traffic&Transportation journal

Accelerating Discoveries in Traffic Science

Accelerating Discoveries in Traffic Science

Sign In or Register Submit

PDF
PUBLISHED
31.08.2023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.7307/ptt.v35i4.260
ISSUE
2023 (Vol 35), Issue 4
LICENSE
Copyright (c) 2024 İlker Ünder, Kadir Aksay, Omur Akbayir, Umran Under
Creative Commons 4.0 logo
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-
NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Issues with Voluntary Reporting by Train Drivers and Their Impact on the Railway

Authors:İlker Ünder, Kadir Aksay, Omur Akbayir, Umran Under

Abstract

For organisations to take preventive measures and eliminate potential accidents, the information gained through voluntary reporting is essential. Employees do not, however, report voluntarily for a number of reasons. In this study, we examine why train drivers, who are vital to maintaining rail safety, fail to report hazardous occurrences, leading to employee silence. The measurement tool, which has already been developed specifically for aviation employees, has been applied to 346 train drivers working on Turkish Railways. The scale used for research purposes has proven to be valid and reliable for organisations involved in railways. As a result, it was determined that the drivers did not participate in voluntary reporting due to relational and prosocial, disengaged, quiescence and acquiescence and fear and defensive factors. The highest score for the reasons for non-reporting was observed in the dimension of quiescence and acquiescence. The results of the correlation analysis between dimensions, which are assumed to be the reasons for non-reporting, point to strong positive relationships between each dimension.

Keywords:organisational silence, voluntary reporting, railways, transportation, safety management system

References

  1. [1] Debbech S, Bon P, Collart-Dutilleul S. A model-based system engineering approach to manage railway safety-related decisions. International Journal of Transport Development and Integration. 2019;3(1):30-43. DOI: 10.2495/TDI-V3-N1-30-43.
  2. [2] Abramović B, Zitricky V, Biškup V. Organisation of railway freight transport: Case study CIM/SMGS between Slovakia and Ukraine. European Transport Research Review. 2016;8(27):1-13. DOI: 10.1007/s12544-016-0215-7.
  3. [3] Akbayır Ö. Dünya’da ve Türkiye’de demiryolu kazaları nedeniyle meydana gelen ölüm oranlarının karşılaştırılması. Demiryolu Mühendisliği. 2017;(5):45-52.
  4. [4] Smoczyńskı P, Gill A, Kadzinski A. Maintenance layers for railway infrastructure in Poland. Transport. 2020;35(6):605-615. DOI: 10.3846/transport.2020.14137.
  5. [5] Uluskan S, Nalçakan, M. Structural equation modeling of macro factors of railway accidents: A worldwide analysis. International Journal of Transport Economics. 2021;48:251-273. DOI: 10.19272/202106702006.
  6. [6] EUR-Lex. Directive (EU) 2016/798 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on railway safety. 2016. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32016L0798.
  7. [7] Clarke S. Organizational factors affecting the incident reporting of train drivers. Work & Stress. 1998;12(1):6-16.
  8. [8] Reason J. Managing the risk of organisational accidents. Hampshire, U.K.: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. 1997.
  9. [9] Lucas DA. Organisational aspects of near miss reporting. In: Van der Schaaf TW, Lucas DA, Hale AR. (eds) Near miss reporting as a safety tool. Oxford, U.K.: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.; 1991. p. 127-136.
  10. [10] Van der Schaaf T, Kanse L. Checking for biases in incident reporting. Phimister JR, Bier VM, Kunreuther HC. (Eds) Accident Precursor Analysis and Management: Reducing Technological Risk through Diligence. National Academies Press; 2004. p. 119-126.
  11. [11] Under I. Havacılıkta örgütsel adalet ve örgütsel güven algıları ile gönüllü raporlamada bulunmama arasındaki ilişki. PhD thesis. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü; 2022.
  12. [12] Van der Schaaf T, Kanse L. Biases in incident reporting databases: An empirical study in the chemical process industry. Safety Science. 2004b;42(1):57-67. DOI: 10.1016/S0925-7535(03)00023-7.
  13. [13] Jausan M, Silva J, Sabatini R. A holistic approach to evaluating the effect of safety barriers on the performance of safety reporting systems in aviation organisations. Journal of Air Transport Management. 2017;63:95-107. DOI: 10.1016/j.jairtraman.2017.06.004.
  14. [14] Park B. Creation of a confidential incident reporting system to enhance Korea's railway safety culture. PhD thesis. University of Birmingham; 2018.
  15. [15] Under I. Havacılıkta örgütsel sessizlik: Havaaracı bakım personelinin raporlamada bulunmamalarının nedenleri üzerine bir araştırma. Master thesis. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü; 2016.
  16. [16] Morrison EW, Milliken FJ. Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review. 2000;25(4):706-725.
  17. [17] Pinder CC, Harlos KP. Employee silence: Quiescence and acquiescence as responses to perceived injustice. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management. 2001;20:331-362. DOI: 10.1016/S0742-7301(01)20007-3.
  18. [18] Dyne LV, Ang S Botero IC. Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies. 2003;40(6):1359-1392.
  19. [19] Premeaux SF, Bedeian AG. Breaking the Si¬lence: Toward an understanding of speaking up in the workplace. Journal of Management Studies. 2001. DOI: 10.1111/1467-6486.00390.
  20. [20] Brinsfield CT. Employee silence motives: Investigation of dimensionality and development of measures. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2013;34:671‐697. DOI: 10.1002/job.1829.
  21. [21] Yürür S, et al. Algılanan Örgütsel Desteğin Örgütsel Sessizliğin Önlenmesindeki Rolü. Gazi İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi. 2016;2(3):1-26.
  22. [22] Çakıcı A, Aysen B. Örgütlerde yönetici sessizliği mümkün müdür? Keşifsel bir araştırma. Niğde Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 2014;7(1):107.
  23. [23] Under I, Gerede E. Silence in the tower: analysing the reasons of air traffic controllers avoiding voluntary reporting. Aviation. 2021;25(3):129-139. DOI: 10.3846/aviation.2021.14540.
  24. [24] Bugalia N, Maemura Y, Ozawa K. Safety culture in high-speed railways and the importance of top management decisions. ADBI Working Paper Series. 2019;955.
  25. [25] Dillon RL, et al. A different kind of organizational silence: When individuals fail to recognize a problem exists. IEEE Aerospace Conference. 2016. p. 1-9.
  26. [26] European Union Agency For Railways. Common occurence report. 2018. https://www.era.europa.eu/activities/common-occurrence-reporting_en.
  27. [27] Kyriakidis M, Hirsch R, Majumdar A. Metro railway safety: An analysis of accident precursors. Safety Science. 2012;50(7):1535-1548. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2012.03.004.
  28. [28] Naevestad TO, et al. Strategies regulatory authorities can use to influence safety culture in organizations: Lessons based on experiences from three sectors. Safety Science. 2019;118:409-423. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2019.05.020.
  29. [29] Davies JB, et al. Confidential incident reporting on the UK railways: The ‘CIRAS’ System. Cognition, Technology & Work. 2000;2(3):117-125. DOI: 10.1007/PL00011494.
  30. [30] Punch KF. Introduction to social research– quantitative & qualitative approaches. London: Sage; 2005.
  31. [31] Çokluk Ö, Şekercioğlu G, Büyüköztürk Ş. Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. Pegem Akademi; 2014.
  32. [32] Meydan CH, Şeşen H. Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi AMOS Uygulamaları. Ankara: Detay; 2001.
  33. [33] Bridges WG. Get near misses reported. 2000 CCPS Conference and Workshop Proceedings. 2000. p. 379-400.
  34. [34] Cao Y, et al. A statistical study of railway safety in China and Japan 1990–2020. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2022;175:1-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2022.106764.
  35. [35] Bienefeld N, Grote G. Silence that may kill: When aircrew members don't speak up and why. Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors. 2012;2(1):1-10. DOI: 10.1027/2192-0923/a000021.
  36. [36] Liu D, Wu J, Ma JC. Organizational silence: A survey on employees working in a telecommunication company. International Conference on Computers & Industrial Engineering, 6-9 July 2009, Troyes, France. 2009. p. 1647-1651. DOI: 10.1109/ICCIE.2009.5223551.
  37. [37] Karaca H. An exploratory study on the impact of organizational silence in hierarchical organizations: Turkish national police case. European Scientific Journal. 2013;9(23).
  38. [38] GAIN. A roadmap to a just culture: Enhancing the safety environment. 2004.
  39. [39] Gerede E. A study of challenges to the success of the safety management system in aircraft maintenance organizations in Turkey. Safety Science. 2015;73:106-116. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.11.013.
  40. [40] Wood RH. Aviation safety programs, A man¬agement handbook (3rd edition). Jeppesen; 2003.
  41. [41] Jain AK, Srivastava S, Sullivan SE. Does fear-based silence mediate the nepotism–employee outcomes relationship? Personnel Review. 2022. DOI: 10.1108/PR-06-2021-0394.
  42. [42] Reason JT. Achieving a safe culture: Theory and practice. Work and Stress. 1998;12(3):293-306.
  43. [43] Dekker SW, Breakey H. “Just Culture:” Improving safety by achieving substantive, procedural and restorative justice. Safety Science. 2016;85:187-193. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.01.018.
  44. [44] Virovac D, Domitrovic A, Bazijanac E. The influence of human factor in aircraft maintenance. Promet – Traffic&Transportation. 2017;29(3):257-266. DOI: 10.7307/ptt.v29i3.2068.
  45. [45] Field A. Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd edition). SAGE Publications; 2009.
  46. [46] Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). New York: The Guilford Press; 2016.
Show more

SPECIAL ISSUE CALL

Innovation and New Technologies in Transport and Logistics

Guest Editor: Eleonora Papadimitriou, PhD

Editors: Dario Babić, PhD; Marko Matulin, PhD; Marko Ševrović, PhD.

RECENT PAPERS

Browse through the selection of our recent research
A Study on the Impact of Overtaking Lane-Changing Behaviour in Expressway Interchange Weaving AreasWireless Channel Propagation Model for Inland Waterway Bridge ScenarioOptimising the Economic Feasibility of High-Speed Maglev Systems: A Simulation-Based Approach for Variable and Parameter AnalysisRisk Analysis of Level Crossing Element Failures in a Fuzzy Environment

Accelerating Discoveries in Traffic Science |
2024 © Promet - Traffic&Transportation journal