Worker Presence Subgroup meeting notes, 2020 05 08 - usdot-jpo-ode/wzdx GitHub Wiki

Work Zone Data Working Group

Worker Presence Subgroup meeting #2

May 8, 2020

Attendees: * denotes Subgroup co-chair

  • Austin Transportation Dept. - Luke Urie*
  • Booz Allen Hamilton - Mahsa Ettefagh
  • Castle Rock Associates - Kristin Virshbo*
  • General Motors - David Craig
  • HERE - Jingwei Xu
  • IBI Group - Michelle Boucher, Jacob Brady
  • Iowa DOT - Daniel Sprengeler
  • RITIS - Kali Fogel
  • Maricopa County DOT - Faisal Saleem
  • Maryland DOT - Hua Xiang
  • Massachusetts DOT - Neil Boudreau
  • Michigan DOT - Chris Brookes
  • USDOT BTS - Derald Dudley, Kenneth Steve
  • USDOT ITS JPO - Ariel Gold
  • USDOT OCIO - Amy Nelson
  • USDOT Volpe Center - Nate Deshmukh Towery, Mark Mockett, Wes Alford, Sam Waitt
  • US Postal Service - Armando Lopez, Greg White
  • Ver-Mac - Serge Beaudry*
  • Virginia DOT - David Rush
  • Washington State DOT - Tony Leingang
  • Woolpert - Qassim Abdullah

Purpose:

  • Review draft of worker presence data producer survey
  • Gather feedback on survey topics and questions
  • Discuss next steps for survey design, publication, and promotion

Agenda

  • Sign-In and Welcome (5 mins)
  • Survey Draft Review and Discussion (25 mins)
  • Survey Methodology and Promotion (10 mins)
  • Action Items and Next Steps (5 mins)

Notes:

Survey Draft: Review and Discussion

  • Since the Subgroup kick-off meeting, the co-chairs have put together a draft of the worker presence survey
  • An underlying assumption of the survey is that we want to capture real-time worker presence data. But we want to challenge that assumption, and learn from stakeholders who have their boots on the ground.
  • The survey tries to minimize the number of free response questions because responses to those are difficult to analyze. We also aren’t probing every nook and cranny of the topics so as to not overwhelm respondents. If surveys are too long, then respondents will frequently abandon their response.
  • Survey is designed with four tracks based on the respondent’s role
    • Track A: infrastructure owner/operators
    • Track B: Work Zone Equipment Providers
    • Track C: Work Zone Workers
    • Track D: Data Consumers
  • Track A: Infrastructure Owner/Operators
    • What systems do you have in place now for tracking work zones and worker presence?
    • Have you attempted to track worker presence? With what technologies?
    • If you haven’t done addressed worker presence yet, why not?
    • Is defining worker presence a challenge in your state/region?
    • Any privacy/ethical concerns?
  • Track B: Work Zone Equipment Providers
    • Is your company developing solutions for tracking worker presence?
    • If so, what is working well? What is challenging?
    • If no, why not?
    • Any privacy or ethical concerns?
  • Track C: Work Zone Workers
    • How do you report your arrival/departure from a work site
    • Have you used any technologies to automate this?
    • What has worked well? What hasn’t?
    • Do you have any concerns about being tracked on a work site?
    • Any privacy or ethical concerns?
  • Track D: Data Consumers
    • Is your company interested in worker presence data?
    • What would you use it for?
    • How accurate or timely does the information need to be useful?
    • How much error or false reporting is tolerable?
    • Any privacy or ethical concerns?
  • Faisal: where will contractors fit?
    • Kristin: We should think about that as part of Track C. We could stand to flesh that out a bit more. We haven’t delved into the question too deeply, but that could make the most sense.
    • Ariel: We don’t have a voice of the Track C perspective in this subgroup. We may need to reach out to find people who represent Track C.
  • Tony: I can help review the IOO track and the
  • Amy Nelson: Please consider adding liability to the list of concerns. This data might need a disclaimer to protect the data provider in case of a collision.
    • Kristin: Yes, that’s a concern that we have discussed.
  • Kali: Are there going to be introductions to each track?
    • Kristin: We haven’t drafted any, but some opening sentences to introduce the survey and
  • Kali: The presence of questions lead people to believe they need to answer. For example, I do not believe there are privacy or ethical concerns as this is not private work
    • Kristin: Ken Steve (from BTS) is our survey expert and will help us confirm whether there are
    • Kali: Although I don’t think there are privacy or ethical concerns, if the survey is going out to workers, that question should be included
  • Hua: IOOs will also be “data consumer” of real-time worker presence data.
  • Several: Don’t forget about DOT maintenance forces or TIM personnel
  • Provide feedback by a week from today, please do that by Friday the 15th. Reply to the follow up email Mark sends out.

Promotion

  • The co-chairs have already worked on a few channels to use to promote the survey:
    • ATSSA: include in the FLASH newsletter
    • CAT Coalition: presented to the Strategic Initiatives Working Group
    • IOO/OEM Forum: presenting at the meeting on Monday May 11
  • Other channels:
    • AASHTO: they have a new committee for work zones (Neil has a contact)
    • LiUNA
    • Bernie Wagenblast Newsletter
    • National Operations Center of Excellence (Patrick Son)
    • ARTBA (Brad Sant) and construction companies
    • ITS America and local chapters
    • ITE
    • National Rural ITS (Tony knows several steering committee members)
    • Association of Governments (could connect with cities)
    • AAA and dealerships that sell work equipment
    • First responders and TIM organizations?

Methodology:

  • We expect to leave the survey open for four weeks to people can confer internally and complete it correctly.
  • We want to make sure survey respondents are answering on behalf of their organization and
  • Goal is to collect information and write a white paper about where worker presence is going as an issue.
  • There are some limitations based on the methodology we’re using and the outreach we have chosen to pursue.

Action Items and Next Steps:

  • Hope is to complete survey and have results to present at the semi-annual meeting of the WZDWG on July 27th. We’ll review that overarching timeline
  • Provide comments on draft questions and validate survey design.
  • Pass along any other suggestions of networks to promote survey to
    • Complete by next Friday
  • Promote survey in your professional networks once it is released.