Health and Safety? (Lymington sacking)

[ralphchadkirk]

Because you implied in your post that non operational members of staff could go on the track without a PTS, but operational staff would have to have a PTS.

 

[passmore]

Because you implied in your post that non operational members of staff could go on the track without a PTS, but operational staff would have to have a PTS.

An implication in my post that was clearly wrong, since you say that he did need to have a PTS. Nowhere did I imply that the current status of operational members with regards to PTS was somehow wrong. Of course they need to have a PTS!

What's wrong with TOCs training their non-operational members such as litter pickers in PTS training?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Nothings wrong with it. Staff that would clearly benefit - as Ian Farretto would - should be trained.

 

[tempests1]

It will interesting to see what comes out of the Employment Tribunal. speculating - Ian may have a long list of disciplinary & safety related warnings on his empoyee record. South West Trains are not stupid they will have access to a Human Resources legal team who would have made sure that the sacking complied with all the rules and regulations applicable. In the climate we live in it would be suicide not too, as South West Trains are almost being tried by the Media. Just about all of the Nationals are running a story, he has loads of Groups that have been set up on Facebook, some of the stuff that is being posted on there is quite funny :roll:. Interestingly enough their isnt one called 'South West Trains did the right thing!' But by next week when the furore has died down he will be yesterdays news.

 

[O L Leigh]

O L Leigh - I omitted the PTS stuff in my post because I thought we had gone over that issue enough, and or was established. Evidently not though!

Fair enough.

But the PTS issue is the key one here. The existence and status of any electrification system has no bearing on the matter.

O L Leigh

 

[GB]

Employers take a very dim view of someone purposely disobeying safety instructions. I know a chap who had worked on the railway for some 12 years with a spotless record and ended up on a final written warning for riding on the steps of a loco for about 10m. If it is deemed gross misconduct in the company disciplinary policy then termination of employment is a real possibility.

 

[Hydro]

What if this, what if that! Aaaaaarrrrrrgggggghhhhhhh! The 3rd rail is live when a driver goes to the depot to bring the train off at the start of the day. The 3rd rail is live when the train gets stopped at a red and the driver has to get on the telephone to the box. What if he fell then?!

The station bloke went on the track assuming it was off. As far as he knew, it was off. It wasn't. That very same assumption killed an EWS driver of an engineering train at Deal a few years ago, when he went between wagons to check a potentially dragging brake at the possession limits. The RAIB investigation determined that live sections existed within the possession, the driver wasn't aware due to poor briefing, and he came into contact with the juice and a buffer.

The electrification argument may well not be as relevant as the PTS one, but this example shows that assumptions can potentially cost lives. If the fault lies with the signalman or the ECO not passing the information on, then he shouldn't have gone on the track without being 100% clear on what was happening. If I am felt to be being fed duff or incomplete information, I will ask. You are taught during PTS what the communications procedure is, and if any part is missing, to question or confirm it.

 

[GearJammer]

Ive read all this and im still waiting for someone to tell us where exactly this trolly was in relation to the third rail?

And if theres one thing from this thread that ive learnt its this..... Im bloody glad i don't work on the railway, coz no matter who you are or no matter how good at your job you are, theres always someone willing to drop you in it coz they'd rather follow rules than know when to look the other way!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

There is no "look the other way" when it comes to safety. That is unless you don't want your job, and enjoy being on the wrong end of a negligence case.

 

[moonrakerz]

Ive read all this and im still waiting for someone to tell us where exactly this trolly was in relation to the third rail?

And if theres one thing from this thread that ive learnt its this..... Im bloody glad i don't work on the railway, coz no matter who you are or no matter how good at your job you are, theres always someone willing to drop you in it coz they'd rather follow rules than know when to look the other way!

Oh for Pete's sake - don't be so b****y sensible !

 

[wintonian]

I don't know the first thing about track access rules but I thought this quote from the Telegraph might add to the debate:

South West Trains says staff are banned from going onto the line unless it is an emergency or they are trying to prevent a disaster.

And I'll add what Ian has said:

Mr Faletto, from Southampton, Hants, said: "I got to work on the Sunday morning and noticed a shopping trolley had been thrown from the end of the platform onto the tracks.

"I knew the first train of the day was due in around half an hour and was concerned it could be derailed, seriously damaging the carriage and injuring passengers.

"I considered it an emergency and therefore phoned the signal box in Brockenhurst and asked them to turn off the power so I could retrieve the trolley.

"I was trying to prevent a rail accident and believe I followed procedure.

"Once I was informed the power was off I went onto the track and removed the trolley and a few other small pieces, such as tin cans. I thought nothing of it.

"Later that week I was told the area manager had seen me on CCTV venturing onto the track and that I had breached health and safety rules.

"I was also told that the power hadn't actually been turned off either.

"I was suspended until they could arrange a disciplinary hearing, where I was sacked for gross misconduct.

"I was shocked. I went to an appeal but they upheld their original decision."

Telegraph

So clearly the main issue to start with is that there seems to be a difference of opinion about what constitutes an emergency.

The other worrying issues is he seem confident that he was informed that the power had been turned off when in reality it was still live.

Ofcourse we don't have the full facts, but it seems to me that baised on what we do know those seem to be the 2 main issues here.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

In this case, as he states himself, the first train was 30 minutes away, which is more than enough time to call the box, have them protect the obstruction and get a MOM out to remove it. There probably wouldn't have been more than 15mins delay to the train. That is not an emergency.

 

[Bon Accord]

There is no "look the other way" when it comes to safety or what is perceived by some to be "safety". That is unless you don't want your job, and enjoy being on the wrong end of a company witch hunt.

I think the above addition is perhaps a bit more accurate.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I think the above addition is perhaps a bit more accurate.

I think you're just being silly now in an attempt to justify your ill-founded point.

 

[Bon Accord]

I think you're just being silly now in an attempt to justify your ill-founded point.

Silly? I haven't even started sitting cross legged on the floor making incoherent animal noises yet.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Silly? I haven't even started sitting cross legged on the floor making incoherent animal noises yet.

You are being silly when you start editing other people's posts.

 

[kennethw]

Those of you wh have visited the Lymington branch, such as to see the end of the two CIG's in commercial service, may have noted the displays organised by the ststion master Ian Falatto. He is now no longer employed by SWT over an incident where he removed a shopping trolley which could have been struck by a train.

Ian informed his superiors prior to removing the trolley, maybe he didn't follow correct procedure, I am well aware as an ex BR employee that the four foot is very dangerous - during my training we were shown gory bits of people who disregarded this - but surely a reprimand would be more in order.

If this sort of attitude had existed before, would Mallard have broken the world speed record for steam. or I recently recalled the exploits of driver Fegg, who managed to beat the Lymington branch train into Brockenhurst. In those days, the branch did not have its own track into Brockenhurst, so to get to Brockehurst first, the Bournemouth train had to be 12 minutes ahead of schedule. This was achieved. Today more likely "can't do it mate, more than my job's worth"

Many locals feel this sacking is unfair and a petition has been started

 

[Popper]

I'd sign my name on the petition.

 

[HST Power]

Sorry to say it, but this thread will probably be locked as there is already one about the same issue on the forum. I'm not back seat moderating, just saying.

For the record, I disagree with the sacking. He was just doing his job.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Thread already discussing this called "Health and Safety".

 

[mumrar]

I am a great fan of Richard Littlejohn, an avid reader of his column, and it was only a matter of time before he picked this whole sorry tale up.

I'm going to have to pick you up on this. Liking Richard Littlejohn is hardly a badge of honour, this is what he had to say about the prostitutes murdered in Ipswich:

It might not be fashionable, or even acceptable in some
quarters, to say so, but in their chosen field of "work'=", death
by strangulation is an occupational hazard.

That doesn't make it justifiable homicide, but in the scheme of
things the deaths of these five women is no great loss.

They weren't going to discover a cure for cancer or embark on
missionary work in Darfur. The only kind of missionary position
they undertook was in the back seat of a car.

This man is an affront to journalism and an absolutely hate filled moron of a person. He makes Piers Morgan seem bearable by comparison.

 

[OxtedL]

Richard Littlejohn has to be described as one of the worst things about modern Britain, no doubt there.

Mentioning you like his writing automatically makes people judge you.

I think there is little point speculating further on this incident until some kind of tribunal has occurred.

 

[kennethw]

I've started another thread on the same subject. I don't say what he did was right,but remember that the man who never made a mistake never made anything.

As a former employee of British Rail, I am well aware of dangers within the four foot, at my training we were shown gory pics of those who did not heed the warning and were hit by a train, but the Lymington branch, with one tainset shuttling to and fro is low risk,say compared to Totton where both lines may be used in either direction

I know Ian personally, that he has given his own time and money to make the station at Lymington Town attractive with displays and information - his aim is to get people to use the trains

If I were Ian's manager, I would have a quiet word, maybe a reprimand at the most.

Locally a petition has been started to reinstate him. I hope it is successful

 

[455driver]

He was just doing his job.

Actually he wasnt, when the truth outs I think you will change your mind over the sacking.

 

[wintonian]

Here's the thread: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=45418

 

[455driver]

Here are some FACTS, Ian was not sacked for removing this shopping trolley that he ALLEDGED was on the track, he has been sacked for SERIOUS breaches of safety.

He has appealled and lost, his solicitor did him a favour by keeping him quiet in court, trust me on that one.
When the facts are made clear, they are slowly working their way out, most of the sympathy for this "poor hard done too man" will disappear.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If I were Ian's manager, I would have a quiet word, maybe a reprimand at the most.

They already tried that when Ian was at Sway.

Now Ian takes HIS job very serious and HIS station is always immaculate, that is not in doubt, but Ian views HIS station as HIS empire to do with as he sees fit and that IS an issue, you may want to look into the time Ian should have signed on for work and what time this incident took place.

Some of the stories have picked up on Ian "clearing some litter" from the track after removing the trolley, this has a lot of bearing on the sacking!

 

[Hydro]

http://zelo-street.blogspot.com/2011/05/herding-refugees-cats-moves-to-new.html


Seems to be a bit more to the story than the good hearted station master doing his professional duty.

 

[jon0844]

Don't worry, when the truth is finally out - the papers will ignore the story and maybe even remove it from their websites.

Most people will forget, others will remember enough to know they now hate South West Trains. The truth will never be told to them, as the readers won't exactly be looking for any more of an explanation than they were already given.

 

[deanparkr]

I just hope all the facts will come out from SWT so that an informed descision can be made.

For all his years of service and outstanding record, I dont think one incident is enough to end his career!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Don't worry, when the truth is finally out - the papers will ignore the story and maybe even remove it from their websites.

If the truth was significantly different to what the media are currently saying i'm sure the local community will be very confused!

 

[Hydro]

If the truth was significantly different to what the media are currently saying i'm sure the local community will be very confused!

They'll just have to go back to opposing the proposed openings of Wetherspoons and Argos as Lymington isn't that type of place