DarloRich
Veteran Member
There has been a lot of focus on the zero hours aspect to this case yet the wider point (and perhaps more important point in a general sense) is, surely, fatigue and fatigue management
I can think of numerous places on the routes I sign in metro area London where the cess is unusable due to NR failing to keep weeds and other vegetation down or because their contractors have dumped old rails, ballast bags etc there.True, but I think it's understandable that the driver might not have acted this out to the letter when realising that the COSS was in his path and just five seconds away. I can imagine the human instinct would just be to blast the horn and slam the brake in. I'm amazed that someone wouldn't react with urgency to a five second blast on a horn, that would be far longer than a typical blow up and something he would be bound to be familiar with as a driver of a road vehicle as a warning/someone isn't happy. That either demonstrates just how sure in his own mind the COSS was that they were safe and/or how distracted they were.
In addition to the recommendations already given in the report, I can't help but wonder if there would be any merit in investigating the general state of walking routes and cesses. The COSS was in the habit of walking in the four foot and did so despite training and there being "a safe, reasonably even walking route" available (para. 73) so you have to ask why he had developed the habit. If good walking routes were more widely available the four foot may never have become his default.
I can think of numerous places on the routes I sign in metro area London where the cess is unusable due to NR failing to keep weeds and other vegetation down or because their contractors have dumped old rails, ballast bags etc there.
There has been a lot of focus on the zero hours aspect to this case yet the wider point (and perhaps more important point in a general sense) is, surely, fatigue and fatigue management
Have you reported them?
Could there now be a civil or HSE action based on the finding of this report,
Generally agreed, but I reckon there are two distinct points here:
1. Zero hours contracts:
Should staff engaged in safety critical maintenance be employed on casual “zero hours” contracts? To my mind, “no”! That harks back to cost cutting, Railtrack and bad old days of Potters Bar.
2. Fatigue:
Fatigue is a massive issue on the railway that is swept under the carpet due to the crazy shifts rail staff of all grades work. There is (rightly) a lot of focus on staff not turning up to work drunk/drugged, so why the relative lack of concern about fatigue, which studies show can be just as debilitating as being drunk/drugged?
We all know our employers have written fatigue policies in place and therefore “tick the box”, but the culture we work under is a different thing. Taking a fatigue day is treated with extreme suspicion and any member of staff doing so can expect some serious questioning.
As an industry we have chalked up several deaths (Croydon tram crash) and many other serious incidents in the last few years, including fatal incidents, that can at least partially be blamed on fatigue and are not in the public eye...
Generally agreed, but I reckon there are two distinct points here:
1. Zero hours contracts:
Should staff engaged in safety critical maintenance be employed on casual “zero hours” contracts? To my mind, “no”! That harks back to cost cutting, Railtrack and bad old days of Potters Bar.
2. Fatigue:
Fatigue is a massive issue on the railway that is swept under the carpet due to the crazy shifts rail staff of all grades work. There is (rightly) a lot of focus on staff not turning up to work drunk/drugged, so why the relative lack of concern about fatigue, which studies show can be just as debilitating as being drunk/drugged?
We all know our employers have written fatigue policies in place and therefore “tick the box”, but the culture we work under is a different thing. Taking a fatigue day is treated with extreme suspicion and any member of staff doing so can expect some serious questioning.
As an industry we have chalked up several deaths (Croydon tram crash) and many other serious incidents in the last few years, including fatal incidents, that can at least partially be blamed on fatigue and are not in the public eye...
The zero hours issue makes it very difficult to manage fatigue because an employer has no visibility of what other work their employee might be doing. Plus, as mentioned, someone on a zero hours contract will not want to turn down work offered because they might not be asked next time. So the zero hours issue has to be tackled to allow the fatigue issue to be dealt with, at least in relation to track workers.I don't disagree with your position I simply think the zero hours thing is easier to fix. That shouldn't be the focus as the fatigue is the bigger issue in my mind
The zero hours issue makes it very difficult to manage fatigue because an employer has no visibility of what other work their employee might be doing. Plus, as mentioned, someone on a zero hours contract will not want to turn down work offered because they might not be asked next time. So the zero hours issue has to be tackled to allow the fatigue issue to be dealt with, at least in relation to track workers.
It's not just the railway either. I don't suppose anyone knows how many people have been killed on the roads due to driving errors by over-tired employees.
Tbh, I'm really trying hard right now to moderate what I really want to say to you......
Hope you read the whole thing, about how the guy was on zero hours contract and had to find other work to make a living.
Hope you read the bit about how the guy was having to work as a delivery driver during the day, no doubt on another zero hour contract.
Hope you understand the stress the guy who was killed was under , because he was trying to help out his brother...
Try walking in the shoes of others and come down from the pedestal you've put yourself on.
The report is a tragic realisation of modern day working practices for many, and no people wonder why the unions decide to defend jobs with decent working conditions....
Not sure there's anything in the Report which says that they had to work day and night shifts, or help a friend with painting and decorating in the middle of a sequence of night duties.
They don't have to, but you can't ignore that there are pressures on people to do these things. To do so would be naive. Bills still need paying and life continues to go on even when you're on nights. Plus the worry that if you say no you won't get the offer of work or a favour in return the next time.
Sleep is vitally important but it can be easy to get overwhelmed by other commitments and promises and find that it's the first thing to be sacrificed. You get away with going to work on not much sleep once and the next time think you can do it again, that you'll have a nap in the van, take extra coffee, an energy drink... Until the gamble doesn't pay off.
Not sure there's anything in the Report which says that they had to work day and night shifts, or help a friend with painting and decorating in the middle of a sequence of night duties.
Do we know that Network Rail were aware of the zero hours contracts being used or did they turn a blind eye to it do you think?
You really don't have a clue do you, the PSA guy was lucky, he got a weeks notice of shifts offered on his ZHC , some people get a text the night before.
Can you imagine the stress and fatigue that puts on people,just trying to make a decent living to pay the rent and bills.
There's nothing in this thread to say that you had to be so uncaring as to the plight of many people on ZHC and other precarious work situations, but you chose to.
We do not know that the PSA was working two jobs "to make a decent living to pay the rent and bills".
Perhaps he was, perhaps he wasn't.
I don't know.
You don't know.
That's all I was pointing out.
(Incidentally, I once worked 4 part-time jobs to make ends meet, but never put my safety, or the safety of others, at risk in doing so.)
Pathetic....
Does anybody work extended hours in such a role for the fun of it? Living costs, especially in London, are extortionate.
The only folk on zero hours contracts I can think of who do it out of choice will be those who are moonlighting to earn beer money/have a nice holiday/pay for a hobby etc i.e. something they want but which isn't going to be a problem if they don't have.
We do not know that the PSA was working two jobs "to make a decent living to pay the rent and bills".
Perhaps he was, perhaps he wasn't.
I don't know.
You don't know.
That's all I was pointing out.
The zero hours issue makes it very difficult to manage fatigue because an employer has no visibility of what other work their employee might be doing. Plus, as mentioned, someone on a zero hours contract will not want to turn down work offered because they might not be asked next time. So the zero hours issue has to be tackled to allow the fatigue issue to be dealt with, at least in relation to track workers.
It's not just the railway either. I don't suppose anyone knows how many people have been killed on the roads due to driving errors by over-tired employees.
I agree.
I see fatigue as not being possible to fully solve without zero hours.
Of course if we sorted out proper strategy for engineering access it wouldn't need to be so weekend loaded!
But in theory the nrl chief executive could announce tomorrow that zero hours contracts are unacceptable anywhere in the supply chain ( I thought he had)
My point is that removes the zhc issue that is causing such comment. It does nothing to alleviate the fatigue issues.
Okay. I think i see your point a bit clearer now. Even if they weren't zero hours they could still take a second job and go decorate effectively is what your saying? So does nothing to solve fatigue.
I would say though, zhc make fatigue more likely inho. Also NR couldn't remove zhcs from supply chain unless they could start to plan work as a steady workload without the boom and bust!
I assumed (obviously in error) that virtually all jobs on the railways were heavily unionised. Presumably, there was no strong union to stop recruits/casuals working under ZHC and/or holding multiple jobs ?
Most still area but the infrastructure side saw Railtrack and network rail use myriads of contractors and sub contractors for short term contracts with staff moving from one project to the next. There's also been increasing use of agency workers , including on gatelines etc who are also on ZHCs . The railway is still heavily unionised compared to many sectors.
Yes - the removal of zhc's does not reduce fatigue or the causes of fatigue AND focusing on the zhc aspect of this horrible case does nothing to address the key issue which is fatigue management imo.
That is a separate issue to the existence of zhc's. I agree should be removed asap!