• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

What happens when a railway person is off work sick?

Status
Not open for further replies.

darloscott

Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
772
Location
Stockton
I've got a question that I've been wanting to ask for ages and this thread seems as better place as any to throw it in...
Say there's a train that goes down a route maybe once a day (or worse, maybe once a week!), coming from a bus background it's pretty open to people swapping duties etc. Now I'm thinking if you're rostered to do this run - let's say it's on a late shift for example - and you swap it because you don't like lates or other reason, might be childcare/whatever, now say it's a fairly large depot (I'm thinking something along the lines of Northern Sheffield with Thrybergh line etc) and it only comes round on your rota once or twice in the six month period where route knowledge expires (I believe?).
If you swapped it away for something better/rest day swap etc then who's responsibility does it become to keep the route knowledge up? Given it was your choice to swap it away etc I'm assuming you'd be encouraged to pick it up again in your own time rest day or whatever?
Apologies for the long ramble, it's a very 'what if?' question but it's always intrigued me.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,397
Location
UK
Route refreshers are often built in to the roster. Or you would simply request a refresher.

Our basic rule is you can request a refresher but at least two weeks before you are booked to work it.
 

DPWH

On Moderation
Joined
8 Sep 2016
Messages
244
OK, slightly provocative question.

What would happen if a driver who was an exemplary employee had a beer which turned into 8, and got totally rat arsed. Exemplary employee never usually drinks, but...

The manager needs him to be honest amd call off sick, as he obviously can't work, but then what? It seems that there are some conflicting intentions here.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,397
Location
UK
in the six month period where route knowledge expires (I believe?).

No longer a hard and fast rule (as per the standards) and is different for each TOC with some keeping to it and others not.

I'm assuming you'd be encouraged to pick it up again in your own time rest day or whatever?

It would be 'professional' of you to maintain your route knowledge and if you had to opportunity to swap it then sure, why not. Not sure what you mean by in your own time. If I'm on rest day (as in not working) then I couldn't just go take a train or be up the front of one. If I was working my rest day then different story and you can work whatever your given or even request to do.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,397
Location
UK
What would happen if a driver who was an exemplary employee had a beer which turned into 8, and got totally rat arsed. Exemplary employee never usually drinks,

If you are not fit for work, then don't go to work.

but...

The manager needs him to be honest amd call off sick, as he obviously can't work, but then what? It seems that there are some conflicting intentions here.

Not sure I understand this part. Are you saying if the employee turned up with a hangover ?
 

pompeyfan

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2012
Messages
4,181
It’s the crews responsibility to maintain route knowledge using spare days and route refresh days.

In regards to the question in regards to being fit to work, by the employee signing on/clocking in, they are saying they are fit to work. The manager officially would be expected to hang the employee if they attended for work under influence of drink or drugs. If they liked the employee they may have a quiet word with them and tell them not to attend work in which normal absence procedures would apply.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
OK, slightly provocative question.

What would happen if a driver who was an exemplary employee had a beer which turned into 8, and got totally rat arsed. Exemplary employee never usually drinks, but...

The manager needs him to be honest amd call off sick, as he obviously can't work, but then what? It seems that there are some conflicting intentions here.

He’s not an exemplary employee if he’s coming to work under the influence, as if for whatever reason he managed to get through the booking-on process then he’s now in charge of a train.

So quite simply the D&A people will be called, and failing the test will lead to dismissal for gross misconduct. If the person has got as far as being on a train then BTP should also be involved as a criminal offence has been committed. Running away will likely have the same outcome as there will be something in the employment contract where the employee agrees to be tested at any time whilst on duty (herein lies a slight loophole, as depending on how the contract is written the person may well not be under obligation to stay beyond their time if D&A take their time arriving).

If someone comes in and confesses up to a problem before signing on then this is a different matter, and there are generally support options to cater for this.

It’s one reason why railway staff are well paid. It’s not nice for the manager(s) involved, but again it’s one of those things where everyone should know the ground rules.

Not saying people never get sent home, but this is bad practice. If someone’s done it once then they may well do it again, and next time it might not get picked up - the potential consequences of which are self evident.
 
Last edited:

Undiscovered

Member
Joined
28 Jan 2013
Messages
409
OK, slightly provocative question.

What would happen if a driver who was an exemplary employee had a beer which turned into 8, and got totally rat arsed. Exemplary employee never usually drinks, but...

The manager needs him to be honest amd call off sick, as he obviously can't work, but then what? It seems that there are some conflicting intentions here.

As said before, if they've got ratarsed before a shift, not exemplary.

If they books sick, then they're sick. Doesn't have to give a reason and, depending on how many times they've been sick, it may be that nothing more is said about it.
If already on attendance management, or a pattern is emerging, then it might be investigated further.

All railway grades are told categorically, if you have a problem with drink, then own up to it, speak to your manager. Yes, you'll be removed from safety critical duties but you'll also be given plenty of help to get through it and back working again. This has to be done before there's even a suggestion of an incident occuring- no use saying it as the D+A come for you.

And if you do cover for someone, and it's found out that you did, then you'll be in hot water too.

I remember a story on here where an incident happened and everyone who had any interaction with the train on its journey was D+A. A dispatcher 3hrs away from it failed and got the sack.
 
Last edited:

Ken H

On Moderation
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,271
Location
N Yorks
If you are not fit for work, then don't go to work.



Not sure I understand this part. Are you saying if the employee turned up with a hangover ?

There have been many cases when car drivers have been brethalysed in the morning after a heavy drinking session the night before and been found over the limit. A lot of booze can take quite a while to get out of your system. If it catches car drivers out, it could catch out train drivers. Dunno if train drivers can be asked to take a breath test before work.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,397
Location
UK
You can be asked to take a breath test any time you are on duty. The second you book on you can be tested.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
There have been many cases when car drivers have been brethalysed in the morning after a heavy drinking session the night before and been found over the limit. A lot of booze can take quite a while to get out of your system. If it catches car drivers out, it could catch out train drivers. Dunno if train drivers can be asked to take a breath test before work.

A test can happen at any time whilst on duty, so any moment between book on time and book off time. It’s also generally more stringent than the standard for car drivers.

Hence anyone who does wish to discuss a problem with their manager must raise it before they’ve signed on.

In theory aa manager could intercept someone before that point and advise them to go, however even that should not happen.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
There have been many cases when car drivers have been brethalysed in the morning after a heavy drinking session the night before and been found over the limit. A lot of booze can take quite a while to get out of your system. If it catches car drivers out, it could catch out train drivers. Dunno if train drivers can be asked to take a breath test before work.

That would be absolutely no excuse. The alcohol limit for train drivers is only 1/3 the car drink drive limit, so it’s necessary to be very careful before an early shift. Any suggestion of coming to work hungover is a total no no on the railway. The nature of the job is that it can impact on how you spend you days off.

As @bramling has noted above, if a driver was drunk in charge of a train not only would they lose their job but they would have committed a serious criminal offence and could well be facing a prison sentence.

You can be randomly tested at any time when at work, and would also be tested immediately if you have any kind of incident or someone suspected you were under the influence.

The best approach is just not to have anything alcoholic the day before a shift - that works for me.
 

Llanigraham

Established Member
Joined
23 Mar 2013
Messages
6,073
Location
Powys
You can be asked to take a breath test any time you are on duty. The second you book on you can be tested.

That was even stressed to us at Signalling School, and I have since heard that D & A have tested students and one was dismissed from their course. We were told in no uncertain terms, ONE pint is all you can have of an evening.
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,382
It was over 500 route miles I think, I did once tot it up.

It's easy enough to remember it, I work over them all regularly enough and have done for years.

The Block Link at Crewe used to sign 650 miles +

Euston (via TV and Brum {via Bescot & Dudley} )
Hereford
Holyhead
Liverpool
Carlisle
Manchester
Derby

and most places inbetween.

Also curiosities like Stanlow, Rowley Regis, Silverdale and various other weird freight destinations.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,397
Location
UK
https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/standards/RIS-8070-TOM Iss 1.pdf

2.3 Positive result
2.3.1 Infrastructure managers and railway undertakings shall regard a test result for drugs or alcohol, on a member their staff engaged in safety critical tasks, as being positive if it shows:

a) The presence of drugs for which there is no legitimate medical need for either their use or the quantity of their use.
b) More than 29 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood.
c) More than 13 micrograms of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath.
d) More than 39 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of urine.

It's quite prohibitive.
 

Dieseldriver

Member
Joined
9 Apr 2012
Messages
971
OK, slightly provocative question.

What would happen if a driver who was an exemplary employee had a beer which turned into 8, and got totally rat arsed. Exemplary employee never usually drinks, but...

The manager needs him to be honest amd call off sick, as he obviously can't work, but then what? It seems that there are some conflicting intentions here.
It's a pretty obvious answer to that question. If I was at work the following day and had had way too much to drink (bearing in mind that by that point I would have already decided 'f**k it, I'm having a good time, I'm not going in tomorrow') I would ring in sick.
I would never even contemplate turning up for work with alcohol in my system and why would I when the choice is to risk my livelihood/freedom or to have a lazy hungover day courtesy of the company?
I've never done this and in all probability I never will but the point is, as in any job, as long as you aren't a routine piss taker, taking the odd couple of days sick once in a blue moon isn't a major issue.
 

LowLevel

Established Member
Joined
26 Oct 2013
Messages
7,543
OK, slightly provocative question.

What would happen if a driver who was an exemplary employee had a beer which turned into 8, and got totally rat arsed. Exemplary employee never usually drinks, but...

The manager needs him to be honest amd call off sick, as he obviously can't work, but then what? It seems that there are some conflicting intentions here.

You ring in sick and give yourself a kick up the arse for being a numpty. They're well paid jobs, you have to be disciplined enough to avoid such issues. You might have the odd lapse (same as the most reliable person in the world might sleep through an alarm once every few year but it's something you should be factoring in and actively avoiding.

If you book on under the influence you may well not only lose your job but find yourself being arrested as well as the railway undertaking is obliged to inform the transport police.
 

380101

Member
Joined
18 Feb 2015
Messages
996
Isn’t it just zero up here in Scotland?

No. It was reduced from 80mg alcohol/100ml blood to 50mg alcohol/100ml blood in Scotland which equates to 22ug/100ml of breath for the breath test.

Note the above is all for Section 6 of the Road Traffic Act and the ammended version for Scotland.

I believe its the transport workers Act that covers railway staff.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
No. It was reduced from 80mg alcohol/100ml blood to 50mg alcohol/100ml blood in Scotland which equates to 22ug/100ml of breath for the breath test.

Note the above is all for Section 6 of the Road Traffic Act and the ammended version for Scotland.

I believe its the transport workers Act that covers railway staff.

My understanding is there’s also a difference between the pass rates for the “railway” test and any test which might be carried out by the BTP. Again the railway is more stringent.

I presume the test regime is fairly standard across the industry, but I wouldn’t like to say that for definite.

Thankfully it’s something which rarely crops up. A lot of random and post-incident testing occurs, however I’m pleased to say it’s very much a rarity for someone to fail.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
Quite. Still, seeing how safety is regarded in the railways up there I was expecting a zero tolerance approach. I suppose it’s a cultural difference?

It is effectively zero. As someone as said above one alcoholic beverage might be enough to put someone over.

As I understand it a breathalyser reading of zero cannot be required because the body may naturally produce trace quantities of alcohol, even if the person being tested is completely abstinent.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,397
Location
UK
zero tolerance approach.

There is a difference between zero tolerance and zero alcohol.

It wouldn't be possible to have a zero level of alcohol. Your body has around 0.1-0.3mg per 100ml or blood. The zero tolerance comes from having a very red line in the sand and that there is no flexibility given to those who do fall foul of it. I've been in a few jobs and you could easily turn in with a hangover and although you would be told off, little more than that would be done. With the railway, there isn't a 'this time we'll let you off' approach. You fail, and your out of a job and potentially facing a prison sentence.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Quite. Still, seeing how safety is regarded in the railways up there I was expecting a zero tolerance approach. I suppose it’s a cultural difference?

I don’t think zero is completely viable. Any positive result will result in a medical review from a specialist before being regarded as final.

Where I am there are different levels for fail. A very small amount will result in a disciplinary warning rather than gross misconduct. I *presume* there’s scope for individual employers to do things their own way as long as they meet the minimum standard.

This all reminds me of the Moorgate accident and the considerable debate afterwards amongst experts as to whether the driver might have been drinking, something which was never really definitely concluded. In that instance there was the complication that a considerable time period elapsed after the incident. Drugs can be rather more complex, I know someone who failed a test, apparently after consuming a sandwich containing poppy seeds. A medical review was never carried out for that as it was as part of a recruitment process.
 

RLBH

Member
Joined
17 May 2018
Messages
962
It wouldn't be possible to have a zero level of alcohol. Your body has around 0.1-0.3mg per 100ml or blood.
Theoretically, if you've rinsed your mouth out with mouthwash, gone on duty, then been immediately tested (whether 'for cause' or randomly) you could blow a reasonable level, yet not be impaired in any way.

My last job had a zero-tolerance D&A policy, with good reason, though the limit for alcohol was set at the drink-driving limit. Rather curiously, the Scottish limit in Scotland and the England and Wales limit in England - I never found out why someone's ability to safely operate heavy machinery depended on which side of Hadrian's Wall they were. As a result, whilst I don't normally drink anyway, I certainly wouldn't drink if I was working the next day. New job, pub lunches are perfectly acceptable, and I just can't make the psychological shift.

The simple pilots' rule always makes sense to me - 24 hours from bottle to throttle. I try to abide by that even when driving, and I'd imagine that a similar approach is necessary in the rail industry.
 

Ken H

On Moderation
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,271
Location
N Yorks
Theoretically, if you've rinsed your mouth out with mouthwash, gone on duty, then been immediately tested (whether 'for cause' or randomly) you could blow a reasonable level, yet not be impaired in any way.

My last job had a zero-tolerance D&A policy, with good reason, though the limit for alcohol was set at the drink-driving limit. Rather curiously, the Scottish limit in Scotland and the England and Wales limit in England - I never found out why someone's ability to safely operate heavy machinery depended on which side of Hadrian's Wall they were. As a result, whilst I don't normally drink anyway, I certainly wouldn't drink if I was working the next day. New job, pub lunches are perfectly acceptable, and I just can't make the psychological shift.

The simple pilots' rule always makes sense to me - 24 hours from bottle to throttle. I try to abide by that even when driving, and I'd imagine that a similar approach is necessary in the rail industry.
I have heard mouthwash has some alcohol in it. As do some bottled shandies. Also some pre made foods, such as trifles could contain traces of alcohol.
Some hand wash gels also contain alcohol. dont know if the alcohol could get through your skin and into your blood. But they are regarded as a problem in some hospitals when alcoholics drink the hand gel!
So I think zero is not achievable. You will always get traces.
 

axlecounter

Member
Joined
23 Feb 2016
Messages
403
Location
Switzerland
I have heard mouthwash has some alcohol in it. As do some bottled shandies. Also some pre made foods, such as trifles could contain traces of alcohol.
Some hand wash gels also contain alcohol. dont know if the alcohol could get through your skin and into your blood. But they are regarded as a problem in some hospitals when alcoholics drink the hand gel!
So I think zero is not achievable. You will always get traces.

Oh yes, I personally know a train driver who was tested when he signed on for an early shift and got a (very) positive result. Not exactly an happy moment for him. A blood test sorted all out, he was just “mouthwash drunk”. :lol:

It is effectively zero. As someone as said above one alcoholic beverage might be enough to put someone over.

As I understand it a breathalyser reading of zero cannot be required because the body may naturally produce trace quantities of alcohol, even if the person being tested is completely abstinent.

There is a difference between zero tolerance and zero alcohol.

It wouldn't be possible to have a zero level of alcohol. Your body has around 0.1-0.3mg per 100ml or blood. The zero tolerance comes from having a very red line in the sand and that there is no flexibility given to those who do fall foul of it. I've been in a few jobs and you could easily turn in with a hangover and although you would be told off, little more than that would be done. With the railway, there isn't a 'this time we'll let you off' approach. You fail, and your out of a job and potentially facing a prison sentence.

I don’t think zero is completely viable. Any positive result will result in a medical review from a specialist before being regarded as final.

Yes, sorry, I was inaccurate. We have a legal limit of 0, wich translates in a technical 0,1‰ limit, needed for considering the above quoted reasons.

Which, if I got everything right, is below your 29mg/ml in blood limit?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top