Teenagers in Pickup Trucks More Likely to Be Involved in Accidents

For decades now, the conventional wisdom has been that teenagers are safer when they're driving larger vehicles, like sports utility vehicles and pickup trucks, than smaller passenger vehicles. A new study out of the University of Texas turns that theory on its head.

The results of the study were published in the Accident Analysis and Prevention journal.

The study, conducted by a professor of transportation engineering at the University of Texas, indicates among other things, that a teenage motorist between age of 16 and 17 driving a pickup truck, is at a much higher risk of injury than someone driving a car. The reasons for this don't seem to be so hard to understand. A pickup truck has a powerful engine, and being at the helm of a vehicle with a powerful engine may increase aggressive driving behaviors among teenage motorists. Besides, pickup trucks may not come with the same kind of advanced safety features that passenger vehicles do.

The researchers also came upon several other facts of interest to Los Angeles pickup truck accident lawyers. For instance, they found that driving with one passenger placed a teen driver at a higher risk of accidents than driving with two or more passengers. That also flies in the face of other theories that have long held that a teen driver’s risk of an accident increases with the number of passengers in his car.

The study also found that teen drivers seem to be the most aggressive during the morning rush hour. Further, even a difference of one year seems to make a huge difference to the driving abilities of teen motorists. 16 and 17-year-olds are more likely to be involved in accidents than 18-year-olds.

More than half of all teen-accident related injuries occurred while the motorists were traveling to school. That is consistent with existing research indicating that teenagers’ natural body rhythms leave them sleepy in the early hours after dawn.

Lawsuit Accuses Citigroup of Purging Female Employees to Retain Less Qualified Males

An employment discrimination lawsuit filed against Citigroup alleges that the company, even as it received bailout money from the federal government, continued to engage in pervasive discrimination against female employees by engaging in mass layoffs of female workers.

In November 2008, large numbers of employees were laid off by the company, and the lawsuit alleges that women bore the brunt of the layoffs, while less qualified men were spared. The lawsuit also claims that women at Citigroup are paid less than the men and are often ignored when it comes to promotions, bonuses, and good assignments.

The lawsuit alleges that the company promotes a male-dominated culture where most of the top and middle management positions are occupied by men, with little opportunities for women. The Senior Leadership Committee at Citigroup consists of one woman and 39 men, while the Executive Committee has no women at all, and a total of 19 men.

California employment lawyers will find it interesting that the lawsuit specifically mentions what it calls “recessionary discrimination,” alleging that the company failed shareholders by terminating the jobs of thousands of female employees, while continuing to retain the jobs of less qualified male employees. The lawsuit doesn't provide any numbers related to the overall layoffs at the company in 2008, but claims that it wasn't purely by chance that a large number of female employees were fired compared to males. Further, the lawsuit alleges that Citigroup allowed supervisors and managers to select the employees who would have to be terminated during the layoffs, allowing them to exercise their biases and personal preferences while doing so. Even the women who were not fired during those layoffs of 2008, still allegedly face discrimination in employment in Citigroup, including offensive comments, comparatively lower pay scale and poor assignments.

Air Safety Organizations Agree to Share Plane Crash and Safety Data

Four leading international air safety organizations this week agreed to launch a global information exchange that will include sharing of safety and accident data. California plane crash lawyers believe this will help reduce the incidence of international plane crashes.

The agreement was signed in Montréal, and included the International Air Transport Association, which represents about 250 international airlines, American and European aviation safety regulators, and the International Civil Aviation Organization, the United Nation’s aviation safety wing. The agreement establishes procedures to help identify aviation safety threats. United States Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood also participated in the signing of the agreement.

The information exchange will work by requiring that these safety organizations choose some of the safety data that they collect, and share these as part of the exchange. The main aim is to learn from each other's data, identify potential aviation safety problems, and devise strategies to prevent them. The International Civil Aviation Organization will act as the coordinator for the exchange.

Much of the important data that could really impact aviation safety globally is expected to come from airlines in emerging markets and developing countries, where there has been a steady increase in the number of passengers flying. The exchange also expects expert information and valuable data to come from the major American and European airlines, as well as those countries where the aviation industry is just beginning to take off.

Sharing of airline safety data can increase safety for American passengers, because American regulators can benefit from the application of aviation safety solutions in other countries with a similar aviation environment. An exchange like this will also help international passengers, particularly those in Latin America and Asia where plane crashes have traditionally been higher than in the Western countries.

Black Motorcyclists in Las Vegas Could Be at Higher Risk of Death in an Accident

A new study seems to suggest that African American motorcyclists around the country could be at a higher risk of death in an accident, even when they are helmeted. The study was conducted by researchers at John Hopkins, who compared more than 60,000 motorcycle accidents recorded by the National Trauma Data Bank.

The researchers found that black motorcyclists have a 50% higher chance of being killed in an accident than white motorcyclists. They also found that these results remained the same even though black motorcyclists had higher rates of helmet usage compared to white riders. Even when you account for individual accident factors like the severity of the accident or individual insurance status, black motorcyclists were found to have a higher risk of fatalities.

More surprisingly to Las Vegas motorcycle accident lawyers, these higher fatality rates remained consistent even among blacks who wore helmets. The conclusion of the research seems to be that even when motorcyclists are not wearing helmets, black non-helmeted motorcyclists are more likely to be killed in an accident, compared to white non-helmeted motorcyclists.

The reasons for this disparity in fatality rates could lie in socio-economic and other factors, and not so much in traffic safety issues. For instance, African Americans who live in low-income neighborhoods or meet with accidents in such areas, may not have access to emergency and trauma care facilities. Immediate and emergency trauma care can mean the difference between life and death for a motorcyclist involved in an accident. Besides, a person with inadequate health insurance may not have access to brain injury care, or other life-saving care needed after a serious motorcycle accident.

There may be genetic factors at work too. A motorcyclist who suffers from pre-existing health conditions could be at a higher risk of suffering complications after an accident. This would lower the chances of surviving a serious accident.

Las Vegas Plane Crash Underscores Residents’ Concerns

Last week, a single-engine private plane went down in a Las Vegas residential neighborhood. There were no fatalities on the ground, although one person on the plane was killed. The accident has once again underscored local residents’ concerns about the wisdom of allowing planes to take off and land so close to residential areas.

The plane was carrying a group of holiday makers when it crashed, killing the pilot. There were three other passengers on the plane, and the survivors are reported to be in critical condition. Local residents say they heard a sputtering sound as the plane passed overhead at low altitude. That was followed by a loud boom a few seconds later, as the plane crashed. The Federal Aviation Administration says that the pilot took off from Henderson Executive Airport, and was unable to gain altitude. He was trying to return back to the airport, when the plane crashed.

A number of local residents rushed to help the survivors of the wreckage. The plane ended up on its roof, and survivors had suffered severe burns. It was a traumatic time for the residents who were left to their own devices to help the passengers still trapped in the plane. They had no way of knowing whether the passengers were alive or dead, and were left to douse the burning plane with water to extinguish the flames. The fact that there were no fatalities or serious injuries on the ground here was very fortunate. The plane went down very close to someone’s yard, and there could easily have been devastating consequences.

According to FAA officials, the pilot of the plane was a hero for being able to steer his plane away from houses in the area. But, it shouldn't have to be like this. Local residents say they have asked the Federal Aviation Administration for years now to enforce stricter rules on where planes can fly. Often, pilots in the area take shortcuts, which might trim two or three minutes from their flight time, but leads to planes flying in a potentially dangerous path, and over residential communities.

Unfortunately for many of the residents who purchased homes near what they believed was a small airport, it has been frightening to see that the airport has grown substantially, and volumes of aviation traffic have increased. California private plane crash lawyers don’t believe there needs to be a major disaster involving ground fatalities, for the federal agency to take this issue more seriously.

What Can We Do to Make Airplanes Safer?

2010 has been one of the worst years for airplane crashes in recent memories. As of August 2010, there have been 13 passenger airline crashes, compared to just 10 for the whole of 2009. We have reached the point where it's necessary to step back and ask what's going on.

It's not as if there is any one specific pattern that can be seen in the plane crashes that have occurred across the world this year. However, it may be time to begin thinking about what we could possibly do to make aviation safety better. The problem is that almost everything that could be done to make airplanes safer has already been done. We have reached a stage where there is little digital technology we could add to a plane to make it safer. Modern airline cockpits are as high-tech as they come, and control just about every facet of the planes’ operation.

In fact, some California plane crash lawyers believe that this overreliance on technology could actually contribute to crashes. For instance, pilots who get used to too much technology and a plane that simply flies on its own like it’s on cruise control, are more likely to become complacent. The fact that so much of flying these days is done by computers could also chip away at the quality of pilots that we turn out every year. In the years ahead, we will have pilots who have never piloted a plane without all this technology at their finger tips. Technology is meant to supplement a pilot’s flying abilities, and it can be a safety issue when it threatens to completely take over a pilot’s flying. Besides, we also need to focus hard on preparing pilots to deal with all this technology and understand it. Another area of concern where there is room for improvement is the quality, professionalism and integrity of air traffic controllers.

Brain Injury Most Frequent Sledding-Related Injury

The brain injury risks from skiing and snowboarding have been well-documented. In fact, there's a campaign underway in California to require helmets for skiers in the same way that bicycle and motorcycle helmets are now mandated. New research suggests that California brain injury lawyers should be just as concerned about sledding-related brain injuries as they are about injuries in other winter sports.

The study came from data between 1997 and 2007 from the Center for Injury Research and Policy of the Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital in Columbus, Ohio. During the ten-year period, the researchers found a total of 229,023 sledding injuries in children below 18 years of age. These injuries were serious enough to require a visit to the hospital. That means approximately 20,000 sledding-related injuries every year.

Brain injuries were the most frequent of all sledding-related injuries. 34% of all sledding-related injuries were head injuries. According to the researchers, children in sledding accidents were more likely to suffer a traumatic brain injury if the accident occurred on the street or highway. It's not uncommon to find children sledding on the streets, and researchers highly discourage such practices because of the high risk of head injuries. The sledding area should be clear of trees and stationary objects. A child, who collides with a stationary object or person, has a higher risk of suffering brain injuries. Besides, a child sledding on the streets is at a risk of being involved in an auto or truck accident. The researchers are not only discouraging parents from allowing their children to sled on highways and roads, but they are also discouraging the use of motorized sleds drawn by ATVs, snowmobiles or trucks.

Unlike with skiers and snowboarders, there is no solid evidence to indicate that wearing helmets can prevent injuries among sledders. The researchers say they need further study before they can define a clear link between wearing helmets and preventing head injuries during sledding.