Policy Exchange propose to mostly remove route learning

[GRALISTAIR]

----- (That said, outsiders can sometimes be useful, in challenging the status quo when this is done the right way: "is there a reason why/why not.....?)

Correct. Sometimes at least getting an "outsiders" input is very worthwhile - this is true of a few industries and not just railways.

 

[skyhigh]

would it not be possible to have a two or three stage training, with link 1 and link 2 drivers.
after say three months a grade 2 diver could for example learn Newport to Shrewsbury, hand over to a grade one and pick up a return working to Newport
then after six months, say, add Newport to Swansea to his route.

That essentially already happens at a lot of TOCs. You normally pass out with one or two routes. As you progress up links you learn more routes.

And anyway, route learning is a small part of the whole initial training. Cutting the routes signed at pass out is going to hardly affect the time it takes to become productive.

Correct. Sometimes at least getting an "outsiders" input is very worthwhile - this is true of a few industries and not just railways.

Outsiders input is helpful if the outsider at least takes some time to understand why the status quo exists. I'm not sure the author of this actually does.

 

[Broucek]

On age, it's a known medical phenomenon that men do not develop a proper appreciation of risk until their early-mid 20s. It's why so many young men have car and motorcycle accidents and why we should think carefully about lowering any age requirement...

 

[GRALISTAIR]

On age, it's a known medical phenomenon that men do not develop a proper appreciation of risk until their early-mid 20s. It's why so many young men have car and motorcycle accidents and why we should think carefully about lowering any age requirement...

Testosterone absolutely raging at that age. For me it was mid 20s coinciding with marriage and birth of first child. I would be dead against lowering the age requirements.

 

[80sGuard]

I don’t post very frequently on the forums, because my railway experience dates from 40 years ago, and I don’t feel qualified to coment on many of thetopics raieed. Havig said that, ask me about the Southern Region (SW Division) at the end of the SUB era from the pint of view of a Goods/Passenger guard from asub- depot that no longer exists then I’m your man

The first thing I learned from working on the Railway was that although, like the author of ‘FuillSteamAhead’ I too am a graduate, , being in possession of a good education does not give you carte blanch to pontificate on any subject under the sun. You owe it to yourself and your readers to have an understanding of the subject yo are writing about.

The report is poorly written, contains assumptions that are not justified in the text, and whilst acknowledging that many parties are to blame for the lack of drivers, concentrates on blaming ASLEF for the shortage.

Let’s start in paragraph 2. This begins with the statement ‘It costs £100,000 to train a new driver’. That’s a nice round figure, it rolls easily off the tongue, but where does it come from? No source is quoted. The referenced Rail Staff document doesn’t mention the cost of training at all. , yet we are told that this is the (only)reason why TOC’s don’t recruit new drivers

The report then goes on hat because of the cost of recruiting new drivers, TOC’s rely on overtime working to ensure all driver rosters are covered. We are not told how much it costs TOC’s in overtime payments . We are left to assume it’s peanuts compared to the cost of new drivers.

Based on those two unproven assumptions, a series of changes to driver training are made which appear to based on comparison with DB in Germany and DSB in Denmark. These would be valid proposals if the railways of Germany and Denmark were comparable to GB railways. I would suggest that they are not. Denmarks network is much smaller, and Germany , according to this website 3 years training will qualify you as a train driver (https://www.make-it-in-germany.com/en/working-in-germany/professions-in-demand/careers-in-transport)

We then progress to an explanation of the current situationn, namely ‘everyone involved is a fault, ((ut it’s actually ASLEF that’s the problem). Well if that’s what the author thinks, then they’re entitled to their opinion, but it’s let down by statements such as ‘’ Aslef should employ enough drivers to allow services to run as normal when staff are off sick ‘ (page 12 Who know ASLEF employed train drivers.!

I could go o, butI ’ve probably stretched the moderators patience by writing this much. . This sort of report isn’t wort tther paper it’s written on.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

The solution to unreliability is simply for operators to a. Employ enough drivers to cover the service without too much reliance on overtime, and b. Manage industrial relations better.

The less of a they’re prepared to do, the more of b will be required!

It’s almost as if the previous government’s policy of forcing deep cost-cutting (ie resources) and simultaneously declaring open war on the trade unions was a badly thought out idea.

 

[The exile]

The side note on page 7 says 19,400 train drivers in the UK, versus 37,000 in Germany.

Which in itself tells us nothing other than that Germany has 17,600 more drivers than the UK. Doesn’t tell us what kind of shortfall each country has or indeed what the ratio of drivers to train miles (or any other statistic) is.

 

[12LDA28C]

"Every year thousands of people apply to become train drivers. They are
not taken on because Train Operating Companies cannot afford to train
them for eighteen months before they begin to drive solo."

Nope. They are not taken on because the vast majority do not meet the criteria required to be a train driver. Some applicants are even incapable of reading and/or understanding the most basic requirements as laid out in a recruitment advert. Many of those that pass the initial sifting then fail at the psychometric testing stage and rightfully so as it is specifically designed to 'weed out' those without the necessary skills.

 

[JamesT]

Which in itself tells us nothing other than that Germany has 17,600 more drivers than the UK. Doesn’t tell us what kind of shortfall each country has or indeed what the ratio of drivers to train miles (or any other statistic) is.

On the same page it has that Britain has 28% fewer passenger km than Germany. So proportionately the Germans have more drivers.
But I would suggest it would be more efficient for posters to actually read the report to see if their questions have already been answered. The writer has even provided links to her sources for numbers like these.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

. This sort of report isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.

I would not go that far but having now had the chance to read it, I do agree it is badly written. (bad from the point of view of not knowing her subject- the English is good as it should be with a degree in English Literature from Cambridge!)

 

[Gonzoiku]

I don’t post very frequently on the forums, because my railway experience dates from 40 years ago, and I don’t feel qualified to coment on many of thetopics raieed. Havig said that, ask me about the Southern Region (SW Division) at the end of the SUB era from the pint of view of a Goods/Passenger guard from asub- depot that no longer exists then I’m your man

The first thing I learned from working on the Railway was that although, like the author of ‘FuillSteamAhead’ I too am a graduate, , being in possession of a good education does not give you carte blanch to pontificate on any subject under the sun. You owe it to yourself and your readers to have an understanding of the subject yo are writing about.

The report is poorly written, contains assumptions that are not justified in the text, and whilst acknowledging that many parties are to blame for the lack of drivers, concentrates on blaming ASLEF for the shortage.

Let’s start in paragraph 2. This begins with the statement ‘It costs £100,000 to train a new driver’. That’s a nice round figure, it rolls easily off the tongue, but where does it come from? No source is quoted. The referenced Rail Staff document doesn’t mention the cost of training at all. , yet we are told that this is the (only)reason why TOC’s don’t recruit new drivers

The report then goes on hat because of the cost of recruiting new drivers, TOC’s rely on overtime working to ensure all driver rosters are covered. We are not told how much it costs TOC’s in overtime payments . We are left to assume it’s peanuts compared to the cost of new drivers.

Based on those two unproven assumptions, a series of changes to driver training are made which appear to based on comparison with DB in Germany and DSB in Denmark. These would be valid proposals if the railways of Germany and Denmark were comparable to GB railways. I would suggest that they are not. Denmarks network is much smaller, and Germany , according to this website 3 years training will qualify you as a train driver (https://www.make-it-in-germany.com/en/working-in-germany/professions-in-demand/careers-in-transport)

We then progress to an explanation of the current situationn, namely ‘everyone involved is a fault, ((ut it’s actually ASLEF that’s the problem). Well if that’s what the author thinks, then they’re entitled to their opinion, but it’s let down by statements such as ‘’ Aslef should employ enough drivers to allow services to run as normal when staff are off sick ‘ (page 12 Who know ASLEF employed train drivers.!

I could go o, butI ’ve probably stretched the moderators patience by writing this much. . This sort of report isn’t wort tther paper it’s written on.

Thanks for your clearly argued review, thus saving me the bother of reading it.

GZ

 

[DesiroOperator]

It's a statement based on entry requirements education wise.

The amount of unfair comparisons in the document is astounding now I've read it in detail.

For example, she makes the argument that one can fly a plane at 18. That's partially true.

The youngest Captain, I'm told by their colleague, (IE the one responsible for 3/400 lives) is currently 25 and started flying when they were 14 as a cadet.

I'm responsible for 1500 lives on a regular basis.

Age isn't the issue. Maturity and ability to be proven in a process driven or safety critical role (ideally both) before having hundreds and yes somtimes thousands of lives is sort of paramount.

There are captains far younger flying single pilot opps granted with less people onboard but responsible nonetheless. It’s also a misconception that a captain is always in the cockpit or flying the aircraft frankly. Both first officer and captain are fully qualified to operate the aircraft. I’ve known plenty of 18 year old pilots display far more maturity than some of my far older mess room colleagues. The hiring process just needs to account for it.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

-------No source is quoted. -----

In fairness, quite a few reliable sources are quoted and linked nicely too. I still think it is a bad/biased report, but there are one or two good references.

 

[156444]

I'm not an expert by any stretch, but I find this passage particularly alarming:
"There is already, of course, a system on every train which stops it automatically if a signal is passed at danger - rendering the need for year-long route learning still more moot."
It appears that in the author's world train drivers can just blast round at top speed paying no heed to the signals because the train will stop itself at a red anyway and it'll all be fine...

 

[Fincra5]

Mainline drivers in Germany use the Buchfahrplan (now electronic, but was a paper book where you turned over the pages as you drove) as a substitute for part of route learning. While not UK practice, it does prove the concept to be workable, particularly when coupled with the likes of ETCS.

Well.. ETCS isn't all singing and dancing... So would never be a substitute for proper route learning.
I'd also want my drivers to be concentrating out of the window not on another screen or book!

I suspect the author has seen a train sim and thought it was the same!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well.. ETCS isn't all singing and dancing... So would never be a substitute for proper route learning.
I'd also want my drivers to be concentrating out of the window not on another screen or book!

I suspect the author has seen a train sim and thought it was the same!

Or they have seen how Germany actually does it.

I find it remarkable how people on here so often like to suggest that something is unworkable that is actually done.

 

[43066]

I'm not an expert by any stretch, but I find this passage particularly alarming:
"There is already, of course, a system on every train which stops it automatically if a signal is passed at danger - rendering the need for year-long route learning still more moot."
It appears that in the author's world train drivers can just blast round at top speed paying no heed to the signals because the train will stop itself at a red anyway and it'll all be fine...

Indeed. Not recognising that a. TPWS is a passive not an active system, and b. It isn’t present everywhere… Indeed the majority of stop signals don’t have it.

Or they have seen how Germany actually does it.

I find it remarkable how people on here so often like to suggest that something is unworkable that is actually done.

I somehow doubt that. They fundamentally misunderstand TPWS, so I see no reason to suppose their knowledge of German systems is any better.

What works in Germany also won’t necessarily work here, for a plethora of reasons. Lazy and cherry picked comparisons to foreign systems rarely hold water when subjected to scrutiny.

 

[Krokodil]

We should always be open to outside challenge though.

I wouldn't mind robust challenge. Not something as flimsy as this though, it's just as tedious as swatting away the tabloid nonsense that has resurfaced in the last few days (restarting a break after management say 'hello' for example).

would it not be possible to have a two or three stage training, with link 1 and link 2 drivers.
after say three months a grade 2 diver could for example learn Newport to Shrewsbury, hand over to a grade one and pick up a return working to Newport
then after six months, say, add Newport to Swansea to his route.

there must be other areas where there are long simple stretches with just a main station at either end, Oxford to Worcester springs to mind

Larger depots often do have new drivers starting on core routes and core traction.

So proportionately the Germans have more drivers.

Does that mean that British drivers are more productive than their German counterparts? Or is freight making up the balance?

 

[The exile]

On the same page it has that Britain has 28% fewer passenger km than Germany. So proportionately the Germans have more drivers.
But I would suggest it would be more efficient for posters to actually read the report to see if their questions have already been answered. The writer has even provided links to her sources for numbers like these.

But passenger kilometres alone doesn’t really tell us much - an ecs working requires as many drivers as a full and standing 12 car train. The average loading of British and German trains might well tell us something, but not about the efficiencies or otherwise of driver training and rostering.

 

[SouthStand]

There needs to be a bit more flexibility in this regard. Cancelling a service due to a fallen tree on the line just because (hypothetical example) a driver doesn’t sign the 500 metres of track between Wakefield Westgate and Kirkgate is plain daft.

 

[DarloRich]

It is a Tory think tank pumping out the same old Tory lines. The attack lines this week are how labour are in the pockets of the Trades Unions and how greedy train drivers enjoy "Spanish practices" after getting pay rise.

Don't fall for it.

( I have skimmed the report - it is a standard consultancy report deigned to drive a few headlines in the Mail, Express or Telegraph. The author will have moved on to cheese trade polices or animal welfare or how evil the NHS is by this time tomorrow.)

 

[En]

Mainline drivers in Germany use the Buchfahrplan (now electronic, but was a paper book where you turned over the pages as you drove) as a substitute for part of route learning. While not UK practice, it does prove the concept to be workable, particularly when coupled with the likes of ETCS.

as we've seen elsewhere on the site with the utter fits beign thrown over Staff being issued tablets and demanding 'new technology payments' because they are reading the same information on a web page or PDF on a tablet rather than on a piece of dead tree ( where in other Organisation issuing tablets is usually treated with ' good now i don't need to lump around a bag full of books and spend time making sure that things are up to date / corrected ' or ' the office isn't going to whinge about my dodgy handwriting - as the form / report in question lands with the relevant office within seconds of completion "
and 'allowance for electricity to charge the device at home' yet in the next breath statign they don't want to be contacted off duty ( and therefore could charge the device in the workplace if based at fixed site or if charging was provided on train - while on train - i know some ambulance colleagues who only ever charge thaier tablets on the vehicles) ...
There appears at least, by report, to be a want / need to hang on to the analogue ways of working

Nope, almost the entire document is nonsense.

There’s no problem in principle with relying on overtime to some degree, indeed it’s more efficient to do so and in line with many other industries. Cutting Sunday services just to avoid paying drivers overtime will cost far more in terms of lost revenue than any potential saving in overtime! That’s before the wider economic costs are considered. It’s an ideological position adopted by those who are more interested in depriving ASLEF of a bargaining chip than they are in seeing a reliable service for passengers.

The solution to unreliability is simply for operators to a. Employ enough drivers to cover the service without too much reliance on overtime, and b. Manage industrial relations better.

The less of a they’re prepared to do, the more of b will be required!

reliance on overtime to deliver the 'base load' of work is problematic , although in some circumstances it's the only practial way to deliver service at least in the short term - but that requires you to be spinning up enough staffing to cover the staff need in a timely manner - it can also bail you out of a hole if the need is very specific

overtime can help smooth out issues like sickness in excess of the provision for 'spare' staff built into the rosta and for predictable , short term , extra needs ( e.g. a product launch in manufacturing or supply chain, extra services to meet the needs of a concert or sporting event or extra services on line A becasue of a blockade on B for engineering works )

traction and route knowledge is important , the question is - is the current UK approach the only way to achieve an acceptable levle of safety ad the resilience side seems to be falling down somewhat
the whole Sundays not i nthe working week thing is a bit ridiculous and it seems the Railway really isat odds with other organisations inlcuding life and safety critical ones with not allowing new contracts for new starters / those being promoted which may vary from existing contracts ... ( see App5 vs Section 2 for unsocial hours in the NHS ambulance service )

 

[jh64]

Policy Exchange propose to do away with route learning - I think a lot more good could be done for the country by doing away with Tufton Street think tanks.

 

[80sGuard]

Correct. Sometimes at least getting an "outsiders" input is very worthwhile - this is true of a few industries and not just railways.

@GRALISTAR You’re right, my last sentence was possibly a bit too much. I was trying to think of a suitable way to finish, and that seemed appropriate as the red mist descended !Again, yes, the report is well referenced,. I’ll admit that I didn’t follow all of them, but did read all the referenced documents in the paragraph where it’s claimed driver training casts £100,000, and the cost isn’t mentioned at all. To my mind it remains an unsubstantiated claim by the author.

Everyone- Please make time to read the documernt. I think it’s generally agreed that this is a poor paper, but unless it’s faults arre publicised, it will be presented for serious consideration . You may also end up disagreeing with me.

 

[43066]

traction and route knowledge is important , the question is - is the current UK approach the only way to achieve an acceptable levle of safety ad the resilience side seems to be falling down somewhat

It’s the way to do it on our network, which is Victorian legacy infrastructure, doesn’t include speed signalling or in cab signalling to any significant degree, and isn’t going to for a long, long time.

In fact as ETCS rolls out there will be a long period where drivers require more knowledge as those who don’t touch ETCS will have to learn it, and switch between that and legacy signalling.

The fact is the industry has been run by private sector companies for three decades. If there m was a meaningful way to reduce training time/expense, it would have been found and presented to the DfT for approval.

the whole Sundays not i nthe working week thing is a bit ridiculous and it seems the Railway really isat odds with other organisations inlcuding life and safety critical ones with not allowing new contracts for new starters / those being promoted which may vary from existing contracts ... ( see App5 vs Section 2 for unsocial hours in the NHS ambulance service )

As has been pointed out time and again, the Sundays aren’t in the working week at some operators because it’s cheaper. ASLEF want them in the week and (where the price is right) will agree to such contracts for new starters as has happened at my TOC.

As an employer providing a service, if you have Sundays outside the week, but also destroy goodwill and/or don’t sufficient incentives for people to volunteer for overtime, you’re screwed basically. That’s what has happened for the last couple of years - the Northern Xmas eve and NYE debacle (due to a lack of guards) demonstrated it perfectly.

but unless it’s faults arre publicised, it will be presented for serious consideration . You may also end up disagreeing with me.

It won’t be, because it won’t survive contact with anyone who understands how the industry actually works. The target audience is presumably the right media, with the intention of raising the profile of the organisation/author.

 

[TreacleMiller]

It’s the way to do it on our network, which is Victorian legacy infrastructure, doesn’t include speed signalling or in cab signalling to any significant degree, and isn’t going to for a long, long time.

In fact as ETCS rolls out there will be a long period where drivers require more knowledge as those who don’t touch ETCS will have to learn it, and switch between that and legacy signalling.

Indeed.

On one of my routes I'll have to use 3 (Yes 3) different types of signaling systems. All with their own regulations as to what to do in set rulebook scenarios. What could possibly go wrong?

 

[En]

Indeed.

On one of my routes I'll have to use 3 (Yes 3) different types of signaling systems. All with their own regulations as to what to do in set rulebook scenarios. What could possibly go wrong?

Oddly enough in life critical settings people , even those with graduate degrees and Memberships of royal colleges are enocuraged to use the checklists and open the book of words at the correct page...
the 'unexpected survivor' effect we saw in Afghanistan is down to not only drills and skills but also by being open to change and to using rule book.

Content warning: discussion of major trauma

 

[coxxy]

would it not be possible to have a two or three stage training, with link 1 and link 2 drivers.
after say three months a grade 2 diver could for example learn Newport to Shrewsbury, hand over to a grade one and pick up a return working to Newport
then after six months, say, add Newport to Swansea to his route.

there must be other areas where there are long simple stretches with just a main station at either end, Oxford to Worcester springs to mind

That already happens at some TOCs. Some have starter links which have less routes to maintain competence on for newer drivers. Then as they progress through PQA and become more experienced they would route learn the routes in the main link and move in to the main link - leaving a space in the starter link for another new Driver.

 

[Lurcheroo]

Mainline drivers in Germany use the Buchfahrplan (now electronic, but was a paper book where you turned over the pages as you drove) as a substitute for part of route learning. While not UK practice, it does prove the concept to be workable, particularly when coupled with the likes of ETCS.

As someone who drives the Cambrian, with its ETCS only (no overlay) signalling, I can tell you route learning is vitally important, but in a different way.
We have 2 speed profiles for the line, the one which you can drive when you are driving under ‘full supervision’ which permits speeds of up to 130KPH on the Cambrian.
Then should you have some sort of issue (there are many possibilities) but just yesterday there was a train on its way from Pwllheli that on approach to Fairbourne the DMI (screen that provides the speedo and signalling information) decided to freeze so the driver had to driver all the way to Machynlleth under written orders.
This means knowing a degraded speed profile which has a limit of 80KPH and in places is even lower than 80KPH where ‘normal’ line speed is above 80KPH. In ‘staff responsible’ you must also stop at every block marker. Now unlike conventional signalling you don’t get any ‘warning’ that you’re approaching a block marker and the next one could be 15 or more miles away, so yes it could be written in a book, but I’d you not hot on where they are, you are risking having a SPAD.

It’s a nice idea, to have it all written down (which we do already in route packs) but you have to be confident in translating that to reality.

Besides route learning gets done alongside the minimum hours you have to accumulate so I don’t see that there would be huge benefits, but I can certainly see risks and less safe drivers coming from it.

 

[En]

Which in itself tells us nothing other than that Germany has 17,600 more drivers than the UK. Doesn’t tell us what kind of shortfall each country has or indeed what the ratio of drivers to train miles (or any other statistic) is.

Or at it's very simplest what groups of staff are considered ot be 'train drivers'
is that uk figure 'mainline drivers' or does it include London Underground, Manchester Metrolink and T+W metro operators/drivers ? and does the German figure include it;s various flavours of light rail / underground drivers/ operators?
ditto some of the Driver Trainers and Drivers as Managers that we see there being dispute over them 'acting down' to cover unfilled turns or during industrial action despite not being in eligible to strike constituencies