Law enforcement has many long-standing traditions that keep us safe and respected in our communities. But traditions do evolve, albeit slowly. Example: The semi-automatic pistol was invented before 1900, but the six-shooter remained in our holsters for 80 more years until its replacement became widely accepted as a useful safety tool for uniformed officers.
Law enforcement was aware of ballistic vests from around 1930, but did not accept soft body armor as safety equipment for uniformed officers until 1974.
High-visibility garments, aka retroreflective vests, saw their way into civilian use around 1960. Now, 50 years later, a few law enforcement agencies are just beginning to accept these garments as valuable equipment for their officers to wear as they work in the roadway.
Car vs. Officer
So why do roadway collisions claim the lives of more peace officers than any other cause—even more than assaults with firearms? In an effort to understand and reverse this trend, leaders across the nation have been looking for solutions. These leaders include Capt. Travis Yates with the Tulsa (Okla.) Police Department, “RC” Smith with California POST’s SAFE Driving Campaign and Dale Stockton, the editor in chief of this magazine and one of the founders of the Below 100 Campaign. An article on LawOfficer.com by Yates was insightfully titled, “10 Deadly Mistakes in Vehicle Operations.” In it, he discussed the following:
1. Failure to wear seatbelts;
2. Speed kills;
3. Multitasking;
4. Tunnel vision;
5. Fatigue;
6. Failure to clear intersections;
7. Failure to wear reflective vests;
8. Improper tire maintenance;
9. Improper use of tire deflation devices; and
10. Tombstone courage.
With few exceptions, roadway collisions resulting in fatalities are unexpectedly quick, and virtually all could have been avoided or mitigated if the victim officer(s) were orienting to potential hazards, acting in a situation-appropriate manner, had remained focused on potential threat(s) and acted the way they were trained to act in traffic. In most of Yates’ categories, an argument could be made that perceiving a threat can be enhanced through education, and situation-appropriate driving would have given the officer more time to perceive and react to the unfolding incident.
Part of the perception/reaction problem can be attributed to multitasking and lack of focus, which allow for the officers to unknowingly place themselves in harm’s way, inviting “near misses,” or worse yet, being struck by a passing vehicle while they’re on foot. Officers are so accustomed to being in traffic that the roadway literally becomes their office. Unlike the average office cubicle, distracted drivers in vehicles are flying by while LEOs calmly continue with their assignment, as though it’s just another busy day in the office.
Be Seen
Let me get back to Yates’ point in number seven: failure to wear reflective vests. High-visibility clothing is a type of personal protective equipment (PPE). Any clothing with highly reflective properties or a color that’s easily discernible from any background falls under this category. Yellow waistcoats worn by emergency services are a common example.
Part of the surface of a high-visibility garment may feature retroreflective stripes. This way, the clothing becomes much more visible in the dark for observers near a light source, such as the driver of a car with its headlights on. Patterns in retro-reflecting materials also help passersby distinguish between objects and people. Reflective fabric has proved the most effective way of outlining the body so that drivers can distinguish a human shape at night.
Legal Requirement
The government has spent billions of dollars making our roadways uniform and predictable. The goal: to allow the traveling public to safely get from point A to point B without colliding. To create the uniformity, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) designs and publishes the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), which has been adopted by all 50 states, in an effort to ensure uniformity of roadways. Believe it or not, LEOs are now required to wear high-visibility garments in all 50 states while performing certain functions.
Section 6D.03 of the 2009 MUTCD applies to LEOs during traffic-related duties who are on foot on all streets and roadways open to public travel, not just on highways receiving federal aid. Section 6D.03 specifically states: “When uniformed law enforcement personnel are used to direct traffic, to investigate crashes, or to handle lane closures, obstructed roadways and disasters, high visibility safety apparel as described in this Section shall be worn by the law enforcement personnel.”
However, high-visibility garments aren’t required during traffic stops or other enforcement-related activities. Even if an officer is directing traffic, investigating a crash or handling a lane closure, and must take enforcement-related activities, the high-visibility garment may be removed and still be in compliance with Section 6D.03 of the 2009 MUTCD, as long as officers believe it was situation appropriate.
Don’t Let Tradition Kill Your Officers
Traditionally, and I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know, law enforcement has been cool, to say the least, about donning and doffing high-visibility garments. As a motor officer myself for many years, who has been happily retired for the past 33 days, I’ll be the first to admit that most motor officers are less than thrilled about wearing a retroreflective vest while investigating a collision or directing traffic, even at night, despite the near misses.
Now the federal government has set a new standard that gives chiefs and sheriffs across the country the task of helping change a tradition, which needs to evolve if we want to continue reducing law enforcement deaths in traffic. Keep in mind that it took 80 years for pistols and 50 years for soft body armor to become accepted as part of our uniform, even though the need was apparent long before that. In much the same way, high-visibility garments must be accepted as a traditional part of the uniform for officers directing traffic, investigating collisions and handling lane closures, obstructed roadways and disasters. High-visibility safety clothing for law enforcement has been ubiquitous throughout Europe and Asia for more than a decade now. This has likely influenced the passing of Section 6D.03 of the 2009 MUTCD. Increased use of reflective gear in compliance with Section 6D.03 will enhance officer safety in traffic and roadway environments.
The Evidence
Anecdotal evidence is one thing and great for invoking emotions, but law enforcement as a whole is a profession that values statistics to help understand the extent of problems. In the past decade, more LEOs have been killed in traffic than with firearms: 534 officers lost their lives because of vehicle crashes, and 138 officers, or 25%, were struck and killed by passing vehicles. Subsequent investigations revealed that when officers were struck, the most common response by the driver of the vehicles was, “I didn’t see the officer.”
Like an officer who refuses to wear a seatbelt, failing to wear high-visibility clothing increases the chance an officer will be killed or seriously injured in traffic.
Our interstate highways are incredibly lethal to both civilians and officers who find themselves there as pedestrians. High speeds, which affect perception and reaction times, in addition to strong expectations of continuing roadway uniformity, result in 12% of all interstate fatalities being pedestrians.
Christopher Johnson with the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety researched pedestrian fatalities in several states and found that nearly one-third of the pedestrian fatalities occurred in situations that any motorist or officer could experience, such as walking on the shoulder or being involved in a crash.
Construction workers, however, also work on the roadways and do so with a fatal collision rate of less than 1%, despite having jobs that divide their attention between work and traffic awareness. The difference between construction workers and others is that they traditionally wear high-visibility clothing and set up compliant lane closures that are designed to improve safe traffic flow around them. LEOs, on the other hand, seldom wear high-visibility clothing and far too often rely on distracting flare patterns and high-intensity emergency vehicle lights to warn and direct oncoming traffic. These devices can have the opposite effect, temporarily blinding or disorienting passing motorists, thereby obscuring pedestrians in the path of travel.
Back in the 1930s, an engineer named Herbert Heinrich studied workplace near misses and concluded that for every major injury, there were 29 minor injuries and 300 near misses. These are referred to as 300–29–1 ratios or Heinrich’s triangle. Then in 1969, after analyzing almost 2 million incident reports in 21 industries, Frank Bird determined that for every major accident, there will be 10 minor injuries, with 30 property damage events and 600 near misses. This ratio is referred to as 600–30–10–1.
How many LE officials have experienced near misses while in traffic? This elephant in the room can overwhelm us unless we look at the situation analytically like Herbert Heinrich and Frank Bird did and use the information to avoid turning a near miss into a major injury.
Making It Personal
Near misses, by their very nature, are rapid events. Officers working in the roadway generally will be multitasking, which slows down their perception of subtle clues that are important to observe if they’re to orient to new and rapidly unfolding deadly threats. In a profession like law enforcement, skillful multitasking is expected, but the consequence is having divided attention.
Next time you’re directing traffic, investigating a crash, handling lane closures, obstructed roadways or disasters and have a near miss, reflect on Heinrich’s and Bird’s ratios. Then ask yourself if wearing a high-visibility garment, in compliance with Section 6D.03 of the 2009 MUTCD, would allow drivers to prepare or react to you more effectively. Better yet, don’t wait for a near miss, take proactive steps to increase your awareness of situations where high-visibility gear provides an added layer of safety. Perhaps more importantly, engage in those courageous conversations with coworkers about visibility and safety.
Traditions evolve slowly. The Old West wheel guns gave way to semi-automatic pistols; uniform shirts with no protection beneath gave way to tailored soft body armor. It’s time that high-visibility garments become the norm for officers directing traffic and investigating collisions.
As for the equestrian boots for motor officers first introduced back in 1908, and still worn today, well, some traditions are just meant to last.
Pat Tobin is a 32-year veteran of the San Francisco PD and recently retired from the Traffic Company as the senior motorcycle sergeant. Prior to the Traffic Company, he worked for 12 years as a police inspector, investigating hundreds of traffic related fatalities and OSHA-related workplace homicides. He founded, and for five years worked as the program director of, California’s largest temporary traffic control enforcement program in collaboration with municipal traffic engineers, during which time his program responded to more than 5,000 MUTCD-related violations in the public right-of-way. Tobin is also a certified master instructor with California POST, a member of its SAFE Driving Campaign and the first peace officer from the U.S. to have taught for the China Ministry of Security at their Traffic Management Research Institute (TMRI).