News-Record.com

JR,

Orange vests are a great visibility tool, as you clearly point out. I like to call them High-visibility clothing or PPE. PPE stands for " personal protective equipment" and includes any clothing worn that has highly reflective properties or a color that is easily discernible from any background. Yellow waistcoats worn by Emergency Services are a common example.

Part of the surface of the garment may have retroreflective stripes . This way they become much more visible in the dark for observers near a light source, such as the driver of a car with its headlights on. The pattern of the retroreflecting parts also helps to distinguish between objects and people.

For greater visibility during the daytime, very bright colors are used for the main body of the garment by means of fluorescence material.

A related type of PPE corresponding to maximizing visual awareness in dangerous environments is head gear mounted mirrors. They allow the wearer to see potential dangers rather than just being seen.

In general, people who wear high-visibility clothing are those who need to be be seen during poor lighting or whether conditions, or when working in environments wear there is a lot of moving machineary.

Examples include pedestrians, workers, cyclists, motorcyclists, hunters, hikers. It is used by journalists too, as John pointed out.

The attention-gaining nature of high-visibility clothing has also led to its occasional use as a fashion statement.

This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it.

* Bicyclists - see Bicycle safety
* Construction workers
* Emergency responders
o Firefighters
* Equestrians, especially mounted search and rescue
* First Aid staff including search and rescue
* Fishermen
* Hunters
* Linemen
* Meter readers
* Motorcyclists - see Motorcycle safety
* Parking attendants
* Pedestrians
* Ravers
* Rail workers
* Surveyors
* Police
* Film and TV Crews (when needed)

Federal Law in the United States require all personnel working on a federally funded highway to wear a high visibility best starting on november 25th, 2008. Firefighters are excluded since the vest do not comply with NFPA regulations. However, paramedics, police officers, tow truck operators, road workers are required by law.

In the UK, Health and Safety regulations state that anyone working in a low visibility environment, or where there is a risk of not being easily seen, High Visibility clothing must be worn. An example is given below:

[edit] Application for Rail workers in the UK

In the UK, it is a requirement of Network Rail that all personnel working on or around the track wear High visibility clothing(or HV gear as it is know). The number of deaths and injuries on the rail network has been reduced considerably since the early 1970's when High visibility clothing and the acceptance of the need for it became common. HV Clothing then was very low tech, usually just a simple yellow or orange tabbard (similar to those worn in netball).

Since then, features of HV clothing such as the EN510 quick release standard and the EN471 High Visibility standard, have improved the effectiveness and contributed to improved safety for rail workers.

High visibility elements have been incorporated into many styles of jacket and other items. These can include:

* Wet weather coats (both breathable and non breathable)
* Over trousers (both breathable and non breathable)
* Rucksacks
* Laptop bags
* T-Shirts and Polo Shirts
* Waist coats (both with the EN510 standard and without, as well as flame retardant types)
* Body warmers
* Fleeces
* Sweatshirts
* Bomber jackets (both breathable and non breathable)
* Boiler suits (both fire retardant and non)
* Salopets

Many of the garments listed also come with Goretex.

High Visibility clothing can also be embroided or printed with names or logos. Maybe the N&R could have their own logo on their personal protective gear? Or, maybe you will not have a logo. It is completely up to you.

John,
Is Benjamin Wilbur Killian a staff member? It’s a little hard to keep up, since unlike writers of letters to the editor, your reporters are allowed to write under whatever names they please. Whatever the case, he clearly is a brilliant, on-topic commenter who has an immense amount of useful information that, without doubt, raises the level of discussion. I hope that you intend to keep him in the ever narrowing band of agreeable commenters that you seek for N&R blogs. Happy Thanksgiving.

Weak, Jerry

John,
I can only dream of being in the same league with Benjamin Wilbur Killian. But do allow me to commend you on the great public interest in the topic of this post and its relevance to what’s going on in Greensboro. It’s certainly indicative of your stature as editor. Honk. Honk. Wave. Wave.

John,
While I was replying to your comment, you changed it. You previously said that you always thought that Benjamin Wilbur Killian and I were the same person. After I respond I see only "Weak, Jerry" instead. Second thoughts, I guess. But not any better.

If someone were fined under this new law, then it would probably be overturned upon appeal as it seems to be unconstitutional in nature and is overly broad in scope.

Basically, it is tantamount to (paid) licensure of the media by the federal government and prior restraint, both of which has been frowned upon by the US Supreme Court.

Those who have paid the $20 to buy an orange vest will be allowed to cover a crime or accident scene, while those who have not will be fined or asked to leave.

If you don't have the "proper clothes" you can't cover a news story? I mean come on.

In its worst applications, it would have a chilling effect on the coverage of the news in almost any application, as almost all roads have received federal funding of some sort. If you happened to be taking a picture on a sidewalk in downtown Greensboro of a person being arrested, the local authorities could charge you with violating this law unless you happened to be wearing an orange vest.

Look for this federal statute to be misused and used to coerce the media into not covering certain events or forcing them away from certain crime scenes as the myriad of rules promulgated by the US Dept. of Labor about what you have to wear would be interpreted differently by different LEO's.

I can imagine that federal and local law enforcement officials are ecstatic that they will have a legal justification for asking media crews to leave the scene of a story because their sleeves are not covered in the proper reflective material.

Are glow in the dark hard hats next? Perhaps big signs on our cars that say "MEDIA" in orange reflective letters. Anything else that will restrict media access or identify news-gatherers to public officials in advance so that they can be further denied access? I guess a big orange vest that says "PHOTOGRAPHER OVER HERE -- DON'T TALK TO ME OR LET ME GET TOO CLOSE" is a good start.

Whoever at the NNA pushed for this law to include media crews ought to be keelhauled for abridging the first amendment rights of media crew. I, for one, will not be in compliance and will challenge any labor or other official who tries to force this crap on our crews when they step out of their cars to snap a picture just because they happen to be near a road.

Any LEO group that decides to enforce this should be ready for a lawsuit from John Bussian or other media attorney and be ready to pay compensation for violating my Constitutional rights.

As Thomas Jefferson once said, he who gives up liberty for safety deserves neither.

I don't see how this could be construed as licensing the media. The regulation applies to ANYONE working in the area. Clearly, this is an effort to prevent accidents and is a good idea. You may have noticed that most retail stores that have employees assigned to corral their shopping carts wear an orange vest while performing that duty. Stylish it ain't, but if it prevents an accident, it's worthwhile. Lack of the proper clothing would not prevent a reporter from covering such a story. Rather, it would force the reporter to work from a less dangerous location.