Denise Tyrrell resigns Metrolink, defends her statements about crash

I just got off the phone with former Metrolink spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell, who held that position for the last seven years. She confirmed the media reports making the rounds this morning that she has resigned her job.

At midday Saturday, Tyrrell told reporters that Metrolink's engineer caused the crash in Chatsworth on Friday by missing a red signal that should have told him to stop the train. The resulting crash has killed 25, making it the worst Metrolink crash ever and one of the worst rail disasters in the United States in recent years.

But yesterday, the Metrolink Board of Directors met in closed session, and after they emerged Ron Roberts, the chair of the Board, issued a statement -- first reported on this blog -- saying that the National Transportation Safety Board believed the assignment of blame was premature and that the board agreed.

Today's Wall Street Journal has this passage:

However, there were indications that Metrolink may soften the admission. Ron Roberts, chairman of the Metrolink board, said Sunday: "What was said by one of our public-relations employees needs to be followed up on by the board and myself."

Mr. Roberts said Metrolink's board had not been informed that spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell was planning to say Metrolink was at fault for the accident. "It's not up to us to decide why this has happened; that's up to the NTSB," he said. "Things have come up that indicate they need to fully check" all aspects of the incident.

Here's what Tyrrell told me:

"I felt the damage to my reputation is so great, I could not work for these people anymore," Tyrrell said. "If I am not mistaken, the engineer blew through a light. The media got on top of this story apparently so unaccustomed to a public agency telling the truth they started to spin it that we were trying to throw all the blame on the engineer. Metrolink is responsible for the engineer, they are responsible for overseeing the contractor. Talking about the human error aspect of this is not a way to shift blame from Metrolink -- Metrolink is still the responsible party to oversee the contract with the engineer and the conductors."

Tyrrell said that she listened in on the board meeting yesterday by telephone, as did most of the board. The board was in closed session most of the time, so Tyrrell would not provide details of what was said in the meeting.

"I am not at liberty to discuss the contents of the board meeting, but I think I can reveal they were unhappy without violating any confidentiality. I was a listener -- it was a telephone conference. I did not participate, I was not asked to participate, I was asked to attend the meeting."

She said Metrolink's CEO David Solow gave her the authority to make statements to the press on Saturday about the cause of the crash.

"He told me to go ahead...I felt that when my reputation was called into question in the national media by Ron Roberts that there was no going back as far as I was concerned. I believe that David Solow's decision to allow us to go public without waiting for the NTSB to point the finger was a brave and honorable thing to do. We have a  basic difference here that can't be resolved. I see no way I can represent them and maintain my own standards. They are free to conduct their own business as they see fit."

Obviously, this is a stunning turn of events, considering the severity of the deadly crash, the quick assignment of blame and then what appeared to be a retraction of that blame last night by the Metrolink board.

UPDATE, 9:35 a.m.: I just want to make one point clear. The NTSB said Sunday that it appears that the Metrolink train did not stop at a red signal. They also said the Metrolink train blew through a switch set to divert the freight train to another track. But the NTSB has yet to say whether it's the Metrolink engineer's fault or a problem with the signal. So the dispute here is whether blaming the engineer was premature or not.

--Steve Hymon

Comments

[K]

There's a big difference between straight talk and jumping to conclusions. How on earth could Metrolink be sure that the engineer was to blame with only a few hours of investigation? Thanks to Tyrrell's intemperate statements, the public perception will always be that it was his fault, no matter what a later investigation determines.

[Joel Rosenthal]

If this event took place in the tunnel, everyone would have died. Video and audio feeds of the cockpit and driver, recorded, should be in place. This would eliminate cell phone use. And I advise this on planes too. The same should be in place in the control centers for air and rail. The union will yell, but all that yelling should be in the press. Urine samples should be required at the start of the work shift. Multiple levels of safety should be in place. For what we are spending to forestall another 911, spend a bit more to protect us from ourselves. Lawsuits that could have been avoided cost plenty too.

[Jack]

metrolink employee, I fail to see how making that statement could be to "protect her job". She is a spokesman. A spokesman isn't responsible for mistakes made by engineers. Your post makes no sense at all.
A spokesmans job is to speak for the company. If that's what they wanted her to say, then that's what she was supposed to do. They didn't seem to have any complaints with what she said until engineers and others started to complain about the engineer being blamed. Then, suddenly, they changed their stance.

[Schigolch]

This is purely a legal matter. Large amounts of monetary liability are involved. Management has to deny that the spokeswoman had authority to speak for the corporatiion. Otherwise, her admission becomes legally binding in court.

[cagran]

This terrible train disaster had a SINGLE cause event that killed so many people and injured so many more. Ms. Denise Tyrrell, authorized spokesperson for Metrolink, exhibited high intelligence and truthful compassion for the grieving families and when she acknowledged guilt by its subcontractor she quickly recognized there was no excuse to state otherwise. It is common practice for public agencies to obfuscate liability in order to deflect causal responsibility for situations. The legal system is the basis for that. But in a SINGLE cause event with such physical restrictions as a train, signal lights, and one engineer, there is defined and attributable error and no amount of circumvention will satisfy otherwise. Ms. Tyrrell was violated when she told it how it was.

[DJK]

Would everyone, including Denise Tyrrell, please calm down, stop making premature announcements and let the Metrolink Board take their time to put lipstick on yet another pig called "Not-Responsible"!

[metrolink employee]

I'm not sure Ms Tyrell is bringing up her reputation for because I work directly for her and it's no secret that she's and idiot who could hardly operate a model train set, let alone involved with running a real railroad. Any one of my co-workers could have done a more professional job of dealing with the media than Denise. She has no idea of what's going on outside of her office, she panicked, and ultimately, in an effort to protect her JOB, she put her foot in her mouth rather than stand behind the people who generate her salary.

If you ride these trains, you know that they are operated by professionals who have a genunie concern for the welfare and safety of the passengers.

This is sincere... I wholeheartedly feel sadness and remorse for this tragic accident. I knew these people who were injured and killed.

I will truely miss you. You are the reason I look forward to going to work each day.

Denise, we won't miss you. Hopefully you aren't the first to go.

[Geoff]

How can we expect to have good, honest society if we allow frank people to be tarred and feathered for their honesty?

Fact: The Metrolink train didn't stop. Fact: none of the evidence indicates any mechanical failure. This means the engineer didn't stop the train. Please, people: stop creating an interpretation that this fact must mean the engineer is a bad person.

I understand the engineer's Union being upset, but their complaints about Ms. Tyrrell's comments are misplaced. She simply said that the cause of the accident appeared to be that the engineer failed to stop the train for a red light, which appears to be a truthful fact. Whether the *reason* for his failure to stop the train was inattentiveness, a stroke, or interference from the sun, is completely irrelevant to the accuracy of her statement that the engineer did not stop the train. Investigation may reveal *why* he did not stop, but let's not attack a truthful official for telling the truth.

After the last 8 years of predictable lies and evasion of responsibility from government and corporate officials, Ms. Tyrrell's actions briefly renewed my faith in public honesty and responsibility: she promptly stepped right up and told as much of the truth as possible about a horrible event, and did so as soon as it was known. She did not try to shade, conceal or spin the facts, and she did this not as a whistleblower, but as essentially the official press secretary.

In other words, she was an honest broker of the public trust -- exactly what an honorable spokesperson is supposed to be. Bravo for her.

Shame on the Metrolink board. Their employee was overtly direct and honest. I understand that they're upset about the lawsuits that will follow this tragedy, but Ms. Tyrrell's actions Saturday were honest and deserved support.

[Fred Camino]

"I still can't get over the fact that a head-on train collision could be the result of nothing more than an engineer running a red light. If the only thing standing between Metrolink passengers and the horrific carnage that resulted from that crash is a human being seeing a red light and pulling the brakes then something is very wrong at a much bigger level in our system."

I seriously do not understand this kind of thinking. It was this human beings JOB to see a red light and pull the brake. It's not like the engineer of a commuter train is like a casual auto driver who runs a red light on the way to the grocery store. The engineer of a commuter train is a trained professional who gets paid to move a train safely from point A to point B. True if a suicidal maniac parks his car on the tracks or if a casual auto driver tries to beat the train, then clearly these are challenging scenarios even for a trained professional. This train line ran 11 times per day for 16 years without a horrific accident like this. I understand the desire for backup systems and safety precautions, but please remember that nothing is foolproof. Who's to say a PTC system would not have failed? Then who do we blame? If a professional who's job is to spot and obey signals can fail, then an electronic system could fail just as easily. There's many type of errors: human, mechanical, electrical, technical. Sure it would be great if we could have backups for each sort of error, but if you know anything about mass transportation in this region (country, really), you know it is woefully underfunded and generally considered unimportant.

As I quoted over at MetroRiderLA, a recent issue of Mass Transit Magazine (January 2008 - http://www.masstransitmag.com/publication/article.jsp?pubId=1&id=4990&pageNum=1) had an article about PTC by safety staff at the FRA that stated this about PTC in mixed freight and passenger corridors:

"The newer PTC systems designed for application to major freight lines have neither been implemented nor tested under conditions of mixed traffic. Given the relative vulnerability of passenger trains with respect to freight trains in a collision scenario, such testing is necessary to ensure that the PTC functions will correctly operate, with associated protections provided."

So according to the FRA themselves, mixed traffic PTC is untested technology.

[Sean k]

Robert Baldwin: Freight trains and commuter trains that run above ground, as you mentioned in passing, are very different from subway trains. Thus, you should know that your knowledge of NY subway trains isn't really relevant. As I already noted, Union Pacific trains already have a safety feature that automatically brakes any engine that runs through a red light... so if the two trains had been UP trains instead of one being a Metrolink, there is a good chance all of these fatalities would have been avoided. I can't believe no one is bringing this simple fact up.

[Sean K]

John Osbourne: her "love of the public spotlight"?! She was the company's SPOKESPERSON! duh. It's her job to stand in the spotlight. And what do you mean she "always blamed the driver when their was a collison"? What other collisions? And why on earth would you accuse her of trying to make "metrolink look good"? Isn't that exactly the opposite of what everyone is criticizing her for? (hint: the answer is 'yes', Einstein.)

[Susan P.]

I was so impressed at first by Metrolink's honesty in stepping up to the plate and admitting they were at fault. No, they didn't know the exact cause, but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that one of the trains screwed up! Now, they will try to spin the story and sweep as much blame under the carpet as they can because they were too cheap in the first place to place better safeguards in place BEFORE the accident. As for the engineer texting while driving, why would anyone be surprised at that. Our society has become so obsessed with cell phones and texting that everyday people look like androids walking around with their cellphones permanently affixed to their bodies to the point that they notice nothing around them. It's become a national epidemic of disgustingly anti-social behavior...one in this instance that had horrific and tragic results.

[Robert Baldwin]

"Gee, the NYC subway system has had automatic brake trippers on their signals for years. I can't believe Metrolink does not use a similar technology. "

I live in NYC. Those trippers are protected from the elements (they're in a subway). There are only 2 types of trains over any particular track: the cars assigned to it (typically at most 3 models built to similar specs on a line) and the maintenance stock. Thus it is easy to maintain. The downside is that trains can't run close together, even when they're clanking along at 15mph.

LA, with both freight and passenger on the same track same time would do well to have this feature, but it won't be trivial to design and install. Feasable, yes, easy and cheap, maybe not.

It is suprising this happened, maybe it was a freak occurence like the engineer having a stroke/heart attack? In that case the tripper could have saved the day. Maybe the conductor should stand near the emergency brake whenever the train nears a hazardous section (like 2 way single track) ... but the conductor can see forward only on curves, not on straight track.

[dianne]

Thank You Denise Tyrrell for your honesty and courage!!!!!

[Malcolm]

I still can't get over the fact that a head-on train collision could be the result of nothing more than an engineer running a red light. If the only thing standing between Metrolink passengers and the horrific carnage that resulted from that crash is a human being seeing a red light and pulling the brakes then something is very wrong at a much bigger level in our system.

[Roger Matthews]

Denise Tyrrell has been victimized by a cowardly Metrolink board, that's for sure. However, she's no hero. Employers almost invariably blame employees for things that go wrong, whether true or not - and it's usually not true - so her statement was no surprise. Her claim now about lines of responsibility is disingenuous, since not only (as far as I know) did she spell that out at the time, but also it's awfully abstract when a specific employee's actions are being pinpointed, even more so when that employee is dead.

More significantly what Tyrrell's statement begs is why there was no backup or fail-safe system in place to guard against system or employee error. As the LA Times in effect reported over the weekend, big business (rail, banks, their politicians, etc.) has been too cheap to install such a system nationwide, claiming it's not techologically ready, even though it's working well in the northeast and the Detroit-Chicago corridor.

This unwillingness to pay to do infrastructural construction the right way the first time, let alone properly maintain it, goes back a good 50 years or more. Two dastardly examples of this in recent years are the collapse of the Nimitz Freeway duriing the Bay Area quake in 1989 and the collapse of the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis. Both were the result of taking the "cost saving" road the first time. It's tempting to ask how much longer before big business and political leaders wake up, but I'm afraid that would offer false hope. American capitalists have historically been congenitally cheap.

[merryjoe]

Ms. Tyrell, as the NTSB now confirms, was absolutely correct in her assessment. The Metrolink train blew a red light, and the Metrolink train was under the control of its engineer. The only question now is WHY the engineer too the train through the red light and onto the track where it wasn't supposed to be. The why is still in question; the responsibility is not.

[GEAH]

She completely blew it. It's not up to her or Metrolink to assign blame. That's the NTSB's job.

She wasn't thrown under the bus (or train), she jumped there.

[rocco enginio]

This is a really frustrating event 23 people die because of someone's careless mistake. I don't believe in being lawsuit happy but if metrolink was to cheap to install a failsafe, then they should pay the price. The lives of people should not be hanging on one mans capability to pay attention or not. What if he had a heart attack or something? They just put a guy away for leaving his car on the tracks, I think metrolink should be criminally liable.

[rocco enginio]

This is a really frustrating event 23 people die because of someone's careless mistake. I don't believe in being lawsuit happy but if metrolink was to cheap to install a failsafe, then they should pay the price. The lives of people should not be hanging on one mans capability to pay attention or not. What if he had a heart attack or something? They just put a guy away for leaving his car on the tracks, I think metrolink should be criminally liable.

[Walter]

I think that it is admirable that Metrolink stood up and took the blame when they realized it was theirs to take. Yes, more facts will come out, but what harm can come from a corporation accepting complete responsibility for an accident? It is so rare in these times we live in that no one can handle it. Denise was given authorization to admit they were at cause. The CEO gave the order. And the board, in a time of crisis, did not back them up. Very unfortunate. Had they done so what a great example they could have set for other companies who run into similar situations in the future. Own up to your responsibility and do everything you can to fix it and make sure it NEVER happens again. Bravo to the CEO and Denise.

[Jim Osborn]

Denise Tyrrell Always made statements as soon as she arrived on the scene long before any facts were known. She usually blamed the driver if the accident was a collision in a railroad crossing. Her overall reason for doing so was a love of the public spotlight, with a secondary effort to make Metrolink look good.

Simply saying, "it is too soon to make a comment, we do not yet have the facts" was not an option for her .

[Raul Garcia]

I can't believe all the anal responses here, basically using word play.

The train ran a red light and didn't side track, a engineer was behind the controls when it happened. It is also very obvious there were no fail safe systems to adequately prevent this very horrendous accident.

So, let's make sure this doesn't happen again, instead of shifting blame and twisting words.

Pardon my spelling.

[jack]

Definitions of ignore on the Web:

refuse to acknowledge; "She cut him dead at the meeting"
dismiss: bar from attention or consideration; "She dismissed his advances"
fail to notice
neglect: give little or no attention to; "Disregard the errors"
be ignorant of or in the dark about
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

To deliberately pay no attention to; Fail to notice
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ignore

[chieromancer]

As soon as I heard Ms. Tyrrell a blame the engineer she would be out of a job.

I suspect she didn't consult the lawyers first before speaking, or ignored them, otherwise she would have never said anything.

File this under Live and learn, I guess.