When I was young, I was
taught concepts such as supply and demand and inflation, and learned about the
effect that governments and individuals have on the global economy and on the
price of familiar commodities.
I was introduced to the
importance of seeking a career that would help me realize my life potential and
achieve a noble purpose.
I was taught that if I
could learn how to create and run my own business, maybe with the help of the
business community, I could succeed.
My mentors fostered
ethical decision-making as I prepared to enter the workforce and global
marketplace.
I wanted the chance to
examine the U.S. economic system, explore business operations, study the
emerging global economy, and acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to
function as a competent citizen, worker and consumer.
In short; I was taught capitalism
by Junior Achievement.
It hasn’t worked out
quite the way I imagined it.
In my effort to fulfill
my American Dream I have encountered resistance from every level of our
government.
I have had the law
explained to me, exhaustively, in a three page letter, by the top lawyer, for the
largest US Government agency, in existence, the USDOT. It is abundantly clear, from that letter, that federal law covers automobile partition performance. I seem to be the only person,
other than dozens of trauma surgeons, who recognizes that violations of Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Laws have severe consequences. Lawyers are astoundingly ignorant about partition safety.
Thousands are injured every year and all the lawyers can say is "Should have worn the belt" or, "The driver needs the partition". The first will not assure prevention of injury from an illegal partition and the second just isn't true. No lawyer has ever gone after the illegal partition angle. A partition killed Massachusetts State Police Trooper Ellen Englehardt, yet the driver of the small car that struck her cruiser in the trunk, is being charged with homicide.
Thousands are injured every year and all the lawyers can say is "Should have worn the belt" or, "The driver needs the partition". The first will not assure prevention of injury from an illegal partition and the second just isn't true. No lawyer has ever gone after the illegal partition angle. A partition killed Massachusetts State Police Trooper Ellen Englehardt, yet the driver of the small car that struck her cruiser in the trunk, is being charged with homicide.
When I first conceived the
idea that an automobile partition could be made to be attractive and safer, I
implemented the idea.
I built a prototype taxi
partition for Peugeot Motors of N. America in 1984 for the taxi model they
wanted to sell in Boston. With the advent of the taxi partition came many
drawbacks, when using the conventional design. The first and most glaring
problem is the fact that interior dimensions are diminished by the partition always
being installed in a “fixed” position. My design would be the first to retain ‘factory
dimension’ rear seat leg room and ‘factory dimension’ front seat adjustment
travel. The Crowell Partition “moves”… with the front seat adjustment. Both
front and rear seat occupants notice this difference immediately when seated in
a taxi with a Crowell Partition.
The next thing I addressed
was retention of seat belts and head restraints. I took a look at the conventional
manner of installing taxi partitions which precluded retention of these
federally mandated safety devices. I found a way to avoid removing seat belts
and head restraints.
The vertical angle of the
glazing section is a problem. Ninety degrees to the horizon is the worst
possible angle. It causes every bright light, such as sunlight, headlights and
streetlights to reflect, obscuring rear view visibility. I found a way to
install the glazing so there are no reflections from the horizon.
Another obvious hazard
is the placement of a steel panel, found in conventional partition designs, which
covers the padding on the back of the front seat. I found a way to retain the
benefit of padding, by incorporating a pad on the partition. Mine is the first partition
to comply with FMVSS #201 for padding in the head impact area of the back of
the front seat.
An aesthetic and
practical drawback of conventional partition design, is the noise that emanates
from the conventional partitions’ parts rattling and squeaking. The conventional
partition not only blocks sound from front to back and from back to front seat
areas, but it also makes its’ own sounds. My design is totally SILENT. It is
constructed from a single sheet of 3/8” Lexan sheet glazing, bent into a
configuration that conforms to the back of the front seat. It makes a big
difference in cab operation when the driver and passenger can communicate
without the usual ‘partition noise’ difficulty. I also developed an intercom
system which allows the driver to amplify the voices from the rear seat area.
It is a significant advantage to be able to hear the conversation going on in
the rear seat area, especially when it is assumed the driver CANNOT hear.
But the aspect of this
idea that really had me stoked was the fact that Federal compliance is not
optional and all of my competitors seem to be oblivious to Federal Automobile
Safety Laws. I figured when I prompted official “letters of warning” it would
usher in a new age of compliance. The letters have been ignored by state and
local municipalities.
I installed no less than 50 partitions in Boston taxis. One year (year four) the police required the removal of the certification of compliance label from every Crowell Partition. Six months later every partition, none of which had ever failed inspection, was required to be removed and replaced by illegal uncertified partitions.
The Massachusetts State Police used two Crowell Partitions for two years with high marks for function and appearance. The Crowell Partition was not seriously considered for purchase. Uncertified, ineligible manufacturers products were welcomed on the bid list.
These constitute restraint of trade and involve unfair bidding practices.
I installed no less than 50 partitions in Boston taxis. One year (year four) the police required the removal of the certification of compliance label from every Crowell Partition. Six months later every partition, none of which had ever failed inspection, was required to be removed and replaced by illegal uncertified partitions.
The Massachusetts State Police used two Crowell Partitions for two years with high marks for function and appearance. The Crowell Partition was not seriously considered for purchase. Uncertified, ineligible manufacturers products were welcomed on the bid list.
These constitute restraint of trade and involve unfair bidding practices.
No comments:
Post a Comment