Thirteen members and one family member attended the legislative hearing on March 8, 2001 at the Maine State Capitol. Seven of them gave oral and written testimony in support of the bill. Below is testimony from some of them.

Jane Allen
Dale Blethen
Joan Blethen
Bob Dodge
Dana Hayes
Bob Reed

Jane Allen's Testimony

Senator Ferguson, Representative Savage, Honorable Committee Member:

My name is Jane Allen and I am a resident of West Gardiner. I am here to speak in support of LD 0869 and to urge you to pass the "Lineworker Safety Act."

I am employed as a dispatcher for Central Maine Power and would like to speak to the issue of working alone from the perspective of being at the other end of the radio. I am the one that calls and wakes the duty people up at 2 or 3 o’clock in the morning to send them out to outages and other trouble calls.

Frequently, in order to restore power, it is necessary for the field worker to go into a right-of-way, searching for the cause of the outage and to make appropriate repairs. Sometimes they are out there for just a few minutes, other times, for an hour or more. At these times, the only form of communications we have is a portable radio, which may or may not work in a given area, a flimsy safety net at best.

Before the worker enters the right-of-way, they radio the dispatcher on duty to give them an estimated time they will be away i~ the truck. Then the clock watching starts. When time has expired and you have yet to hear from the worker, you call them on the radio and hope they answer. When they don’t, you wait another 5 minutes and try again. After 15 minutes, you call the supervisor on duty to go and check on them, knowing that if contact was made with a live line it’s already too late to make a difference.

Meanwhile, you worry and grow more anxious because you know they went alone and on foot. You know they brought their hooks for climbing with them, that’s a given. You also know that they are dependent on artificial light in the middle of the night, limiting their visibility and their ability to maybe see a line down in front of them. And the worrying goes on until you hear their voice and you’re able to breathe a sigh of relief.

These are my co-workers and friends out there and 99% of the time, all goes well. It’s that remaining 1% of the time this bill addresses.

Three years ago, I was at the other end of the radio when a circuit kicked out and I heard those words you never want to hear, "We have a lineman down." It’s a feeling that defies description. And since this time, I have attended two funerals for co-workers and friends, also a feeling that defies description.

Had this bill been in place earlier, it would have meant one less funeral.

I grew up with the saying, "As Maine goes, so goes the nation." I still believe this to be true and that the corporate bottom line will never take priority over the well-being and safety of its’ workers. The passage of LD 0869 will drastically reduce the risk involve for the workers in the utility industry.

Back to top

Dale Blethen's Testimony

Honored legislators and guests,

My name is Dale Blethen and I am here as a Central Maine Power Company line worker to testify on behalf of LD 869. Now that our power production and distribution are controlled by out-of-state interests, I do not have the same confidence that safety is foremost in the minds of upper management. I know that the current president and her staff are committed to maintaining our current safety program. But as the parent company grows, I fear that safety will not have the same priority that it does now. It appears that money is their bottom line and safety costs money. I worry that safety will become a bargaining chip at future contract negotiations.

On average, in the United States, a line worker is electrocuted every two weeks. Even more are injured by electrical accidents. Many are permanently disabled from loss of limbs and severe burns. I have personally observed the effects of fatigue on line workers. I was once riding with a worker who had been working about twenty hours. He told me that he felt perfectly fine, but he began driving so erratically that I asked him to pull over and let me drive. Another co-worker got his foot pinned between the rungs of an extension ladder. He would not have been able to free himself if he had been alone. While I was patrolling a right-of-way alone, a tree fell so close to me that the branches grazed my face. If I had been hit, it could have been several hours before anyone found me. One line worker fell in a well, while patrolling a line. Luckily there was some one close enough to help rescue him.

In an effort to save money, companies across the country are downsizing. When this happens in an electrical company safety can be compromised. Being a member of the National Safety Council, Labor division, I am constantly made aware of problems with safety throughout the electrical industry. I am currently working on a special committee formed by the utilities committee of the National Safety Council to develop a high-voltage safety training program for line workers. The formation of this committee was prompted by the increase in fatalities and injuries among line workers nation wide. I strongly support the passage of this bill to ensure the health and safety of all line workers in the State of Maine.

Back to top

Joan Blethen's Testimony

Honored legislators and guests,

My name is Joan Blethen and I am here as the wife of a lineman to testify on behalf of LD 869. I know, and I agree, that we should only make laws after careful consideration using reason and logic. But when a law is proposed to protect lives, there has to be an emotional component as well.

On Dec. 12, 1999, I received a phone call from a CMP Farmington employee informing me that a line worker had been electrocuted. My husband was working that day. My adrenaline pumped and I felt as if something was squeezing the breath out of me. Logic told me that my husband was probably safe, but my heart was racing and my hands were shaking. It took three tries to dial his pager number correctly. I paced the floor with tears running down my face as I waited for his call. Relief flooded me as the phone rang and I picked it up to hear my husband’s voice. But I knew that the torment and grief had just begun for another family. Did you know that when a person is electrocuted, his blood boils and internal organs could suffer severe damage? Although you may only see small burns on the outside, the inside can be damaged beyond repair. Though you keep it at the back of your mind, this fear is always with the families of line workers.

I have seen firsthand what happens to a line worker who works too many hours. During the ice storm, my husband first worked 36 hours straight and then began shifts of 18 hours with 6 hours rest time. Add to that the cold and wind conditions he was working under. These factors increase the fatigue and exhaustion the body feels. Most of the time I was asleep when he came in to rest. When I finally did see him, I was afraid for his health and safety. His speech was slurred and his movements were slowed. I asked him to please take more time to rest. He told me he couldn’t; it was an emergency. Although the shifts shortened to 17 hours and then to 16, for 20 days straight he continued this grueling schedule. After one night’s full rest he was then sent to another district to work for another 5 days. The next week he was the duty man for 7 days. It took him months to fully recover his health.

Emotions aside, there are logical reasons to enact this law. First, let me say that the Union and CMP have worked to improve safety standards since the Churchill accident. However, all of these improvements had to be negotiated. The force of law would ensure that basic safety standards for line workers are guaranteed and will not be subject to future negotiations. The force of law would also ensure that line workers would not feel the pressure of losing their jobs if they feel they are endangering themselves or others and ask for rest time or ask for qualified help when working on high voltage wires. It would ensure that a tired line worker whose judgement is impaired would not be asked to judge his own capacity to continue working. It would ensure that money is not the driving force behind determining what safety rules are necessary.

We enacted a seatbelt law to protect drivers and their passengers. We enacted laws to protect emergency workers and road construction crews. Don’t let Brent Churchill’s or any other line worker’s death be for nothing. Pass this bill to protect line workers.

Back to top

Bob Dodge's Testimony

Senator Ferguson, Representative Savage, Honorable Members of the Committee,

My name is Robert Dodge. I am here in support of this bill.

I live in Wales and I am from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union 1837. Our members work at utilities in Maine and New Hampshire, including Central Maine Power Co, Bangor Hydro Electric Co, and Maine Public Service Co. I worked as a lineworker and a troubleshooter for Central Maine Power Co from 1970 to 1995. I have served as the Assistant Business Manager for IBEW Local 1837 since 1995. I have also been an active member of the Labor Division of the National Safety Council for over five years.

From my conversations at the National Safety Council with other lineworkers from around the US and Canada, I have learned that the lineworkers in this state do more alone than lineworkers in most if not all other states and provinces. Also, during the Ice Storm of 1998, lineworkers who came to Maine from other states to help expressed surprise at the amount lineworkers here were expected to do without other lineworkers present.

It is our concern that with the new pressures of competition in this industry we have seen increasing pressures on the workforce to do more alone and work longer hours in the name of efficiency and at the expense of safety.

We want to make it clear that we believe having trained qualified lineworkers working at least in pairs can make the difference between life and death for a worker if an accident occurs.

There was another electrical contact accident that happened in Maine on January 10th, 1978. The circumstances of that accident were almost identical to the Brent Churchill accident. They both involved a lineworker with leather gloves reaching out and grabbing a 7200 volt line. In both cases the electricity traveled into one hand and exited through the other. Both workers slumped down in the belt and broke contact with the wire. The one glaring difference in the two accidents was that in the Churchill accident there was no one on the job site trained to do a poletop rescue to begin CPR.

We all know the results of the Churchill accident. I also know the results of the other accident. That lineworker is alive and well. There was a qualified lineworker on that job who climbed the pole, administered first aid and began CPR, then lowered the injured worker to the ground. It is my personal opinion that the Churchill accident could very well have turned out differently if there had been another qualified lineworker at the scene.

I have included details of the two accidents in our information packet for you to review.

We know that at least one of the companies where we represent workers has told their workers that they oppose this bill because they feel that these issues should be negotiated between the company and the union. It is true that we have successfully negotiated some of the protections this bill provides with some of the companies where we represent workers. However, in the deregulated world where companies are being bought by successively larger companies, the people who make the decisions about where a company will or won’t go on safety issues at negotiations are further and further away from the people who are taking these risks every day. Additionally, not all lineworkers have the ability to negotiate their work rules, but they all face the same risks every day. This bill would help to level the playing field for safety for lineworkers.

Several of our members have pointed out that they would like to see the bill amended to read that you can’t work more than 17 hours in any twenty-four hour period because as written you could still work sixteen hours, have one hour off and be called back in for another sixteen hours.

In addition to the details of the accidents, I have included a job risk summary that we thought would be helpful for you to understand the specifics of some the work that lineworkers perform. I have also included a copy of the law related to working alone which is currently on the books in Massachusetts.

And, finally, we have included an address from a Fatigue Symposium detailing the causes and effects of fatigue on human beings. I would particularly point your attention to the observation that the victim of fatigue is often not him or herself aware of the condition.

If you have any questions, I would be glad to answer them.

Back to top

Bill Dunn's Testimony

I’m Bill Dunn. I’ve been a lineworker in the state of Maine for 16 years. In those 16 years I’ve seen many changes to the industry. The largest of those many changes is probably deregulation. The Legislature had a driving force in that deregulation.

Deregulation can have many benefits for the customer. The goal is obviously a superior product at the most reasonable price. A balance between the two must be attained. The front line employees primarily achieve the superior product. The management strives for cost cutting measures to achieve the reasonable price. Unfortunately in the organization I work with, those cost cutting measures have been doing more with less. Working more hours with less sleep. Performing more skilled tasks with less skilled assistance. All the while, the organization has no problem signing multi million dollar "golden parachute" deals with the highest levels of management of the organization. It appears to be obvious where the priorities are.

Unfortunately as this process continues, we jeopardize the safety of the front line employees for the benefit of the pocket books of the higher levels of the organization. It’s a sad day indeed, when we need to enact legislation to protect the welfare of those people that make the electricity move down the wires! In the past I’ve worked over 40 continuous hours. You end up on "auto-pilot". Your body goes through the motions but you can’t remember what those motions were two minutes later. Unfortunately, some of those moves you wouldn’t have done with adequate rest. As I get older I realize rest is a good thing. A needed thing!

In the proposed Act, I recommend an amendment. It should read, "…no more than 17 hours worked in any 24 hour period without 7 continuous hours rest". In the organization I work, I could work 16 continuous hours, have a 2½-hour break, and be expected to work 16 more consecutive hours. This scenario, because we’re forced to work more with less, could repeat itself day after day.

Not only is this worthy legislation, given the deregulated environment, the recommended amendment is needed. Let’s not allow another catastrophe to happen before we do something!

Back to top

Dana Hayes' Testimony

It wasn’t so long ago that CMP downsized and closed service centers all in the name of saving money. But this created a problem, who was going to do all the work that management said they didn’t have. Management developed troubleshooters and service workers to fill the holes left by combining the service centers. These workers work alone everyday and are asked to do more and more.

Management covers themselves by saying "follow the safety book and if you need help call". That’s fine until the unexpected happens and you are all alone.

The night Brent died I was a part of the crew that was sent from Brunswick to help. By the time we got back to Brunswick, I had been up for over 40 plus hours as well as most of the other workers.

After this tragic accident, management talked about changing how we do business. How we would have two qualified line workers together in storms and not work more than 17 hours without 7 hours off.

The 17/7 version which has been implemented by management is one in which only the dutyperson is the only one that will only work 17 hours in a 24 hour period. The normal worker can work 8 to 16 hours, go home for 2 hours, then get called back out and then start the 17/7 from that point.

Also the company in a system emergency can work the normal worker up to a total of 24 hours, not 17. For example, the last big storm I was asked to be dutyinan after working my normal 8 hour shift. I went home and at 9:15 that night, I was called out. I worked all night, and around 1:30 in the aflemoon I radioed into Brunswick as I was coming up on my 17 hours and did not want to go over. I was informed that my being dutyman didn’t count because I was dutyman for just the weekend and that I could work up to 24 hours. By the time I got home, I was up for over 36 hours.

In this storm and others, we have had workers working alone. Management says that they do the best they can with what they have, and again "just follow the safety rules and you will be safe. If you need help, just call." Sometime you get help and sometime you get "do the best you can".

Now that the work force is being cut again, I fear that the opportunity for accidents will become increased, both for workers and public in general. In this profession there is no room for a mistake or a bad day, nor should one man have to work alone just to save money. Without the passing of the Churchhill bill, it will not be if another accident will happen, but when!

Please, for the safety of all concerned I urge you to pass this bill. Thank you.

Back to top

Bob Reed's Testimony

First of all I want to thank this distinguished body for the opportunity to address you on this very important subject.

My name is Robert W. Reed. I’m forty -seven years old and I live in Aroostook County in the town of Presque Isle and have lived there for twenty-three years. I work for Maine Public service and have worked for them for the past going on twenty-one years, seventeen of those years as a First Class Lineworker and twelve of those years as a Lead Line Worker. I still have fifteen years to work before I can retire, God willing, and that’s a long time for things to go wrong or go right. I love my job. I like working with my hands, working to help other people to provide a service to our customers.

I would like to take a few minutes of your time to stress to you how important this piece of legislation with your help will be to help me come home each and every night.

My co-workers have asked me to come here to speak on their behalf about how important the Lineworkers’ Safety Act will be to them and to other lineworkers that don’t have contracts to help them in these matters.

At this time I would like to tell you how important that second qualified lineworkers can and has been in the past to keep ourselves safe.

The first incident that comes to mind occurred in 1985 when a Journeyman First Class Lineworker with twenty-six years’ experience was dispatched to a very remote area to a no-power call alone. When the lineworker arrived he found the fuse blown and a tree on the line. Using standard operating procedures he went aloft in an arial bucket truck with a chainsaw in his han to remove the tree - a task he had performed hundreds of time before without incident. But this time a midjudgement on his part resulted in injury. The force of the wire coming up and the tree going down threw the saw. Trying to hang on to the saw resulted in a broken wrist and a damaged saw when it hit the ground. Being alone with a broken wrist twenty miles from a hospital and help, he called for help on the radio then went about to finish restoring power to this remote area while he waited for help to arrive. After finishing the job he was on, he then drove - with his broken right wrist tucked inside his shirt - he then drove a standard transmission bucket truck ten miles down the road until he met me and another lineworker. The other lineworker then picked up the injured lineworker and tranported him until they met the ambulance down the road while I took over the truck the injured man had been driving and went about restoring more power - alone.

The second incident occurred in 1989 during routine work. Two qualified lineworkers with a combined fifty years of experience were doing fusing coordinations. One man went aloft into the working position using a bucket truck. This after several other jobs. Once in the working position, just as he was reaching to start work a hydraulic hose burst, spraying hydraulic fluid into his face and eyes, blinding him so he couldn’t see to move away from the hot conductor or even know which way to move. Holding still so as not to touch anything hot he yelled for the second lineworker. The second lineworker, seeing what was happening was moving into action using the lower controls on the truck to get the first man on the ground safely and to administer first aid.

The last incident occurred during routine work when four lineworkers were doing some secondary work off hooks on poles. While one worker was up a forty foot pole making connections on a hot secondary line, one of his hooks broke off leaving him stranded up a pole with no way down. One of the other lineworkers climbed up the pole and changed the broken climber with a good one so he could get down off the pole.

These are only small examples of how important that second man is to all of us. Things can go wrong in a very bad way in a split second. Without that second man to assist in times of trouble and his ability to act in a safe and swift manner can mean the difference between sometimes a minor incident and a major catastrophe.

Our work is very dangerous at times and not always in the best environment conditiona and a lot of time at night giving every task that added challenge with reduced sight.

That second man is there to consult before during and after each and every job to insure our safety plus the safety of the public.

Back to top