23/01/19 21:56 Leeds to Skipton - passengers kicked off at Shipley as driver had exceeded hours?

[etr221]

Reading what's been posted, and looking at what's on RTT ... I'm struggling to understand:
From RTT, the train in question left Leeds 36L, arrived Shipley 46L, dep 56L - presumably after spending 10mins detraining the passengers, to arrive Skipton 46L. So had it proceeded as normal from Shipley, after scheduled 1 min stop, still 46L, was there any reason for it to have been expected to be more than 46L at Skipton? So either the driver was 'within hours', or they were already exceeded, and the consequences already incurred? Either way, turfing the passengers off at Shipley does not seem sensible... and so - either the driver was already dangerously close to exceeding hours at Leeds, in which case why was the train allowed to start? (Would the passengers have been better off waiting at Leeds?), or he had enough in hand for the train to run as normal. And if he did run out at Shipley, why could the train run on to Skipton?

Things not posted (so I don't know) - what announcements were made? (Were the passengers told there would be another train in 20 minutes? or when?) And is/was Shipley manned at the time, so the passengers weren't just abandoned?

 

[DanDaDriver]

You can refuse to drive after twelve hours.

If you really want to be a d**k then you can refuse to drive after your booked day. Not many drivers I know would do this in this sort of situation.

If you’re going over twelve then you need authorisation. If they won’t authorise it then theres nothing you can do.

I suspect there’s a lot we don’t know about this particular event.

 

[Bantamzen]

There's not going to be any seriously ill people or elderly travelling around at that time of night anyway surely?? A train at that time of night would be more likely to be a vomit comet and therefore anyone kicked offore likely than not to have their beer coat on which magically warms you up in sub zero temps!! Seroiusly though, They're hard and fast rules which no one would bat an eyelid if it was a pilot going over hours. A train driver is no different and yet there seems to be more pressure on us to put up with this kind of thing. (We can go over work hours, but not driving hours without an enforced break period)

Actually there are rules around pilot flying hours, both in terms of hours per week / month / year, and more complex rules on flying hours in any given day. Plus of unlike drivers, pilots of most commercial flights always have a co-pilot & can schedule rest periods during longer flights and/or delays.

 

[Dieseldriver]

Actually there are rules around pilot flying hours, both in terms of hours per week / month / year, and more complex rules on flying hours in any given day. Plus of unlike drivers, pilots of most commercial flights always have a co-pilot & can schedule rest periods during longer flights and/or delays.

I think you've misunderstood what driver_m was saying? He didn't dispute that Pilots are subject to complex rules regarding hours on duty, hours flying etc (similar to Train Drivers). The thing he takes exception to (as do I) is that it seems the general public are more irritated by Train Drivers requiring to work to these safety rules than when other jobs do. This is a constant source of irritation to me as I really think the difference in attitudes is largely down to the misconception that Train Drivers are knuckle dragging monkeys performing an easy role pushing a handle backwards and forwards for 100k a year. People don't understand what the role actually involves and therefore don't understand why we need to work to such stringent rules.

 

[Bantamzen]

I think you've misunderstood what driver_m was saying? He didn't dispute that Pilots are subject to complex rules regarding hours on duty, hours flying etc (similar to Train Drivers). The thing he takes exception to (as do I) is that it seems the general public are more irritated by Train Drivers requiring to work to these safety rules than when other jobs do. This is a constant source of irritation to me as I really think the difference in attitudes is largely down to the misconception that Train Drivers are knuckle dragging monkeys performing an easy role pushing a handle backwards and forwards for 100k a year. People don't understand what the role actually involves and therefore don't understand why we need to work to such stringent rules.

Ah, maybe I did misunderstand. But I do agree, the public perception of train drivers does seem to be increasingly handle pushers on big salaries, which of course is simply not true. Listening to random conversations I've heard in airports, & thanks to more & more negative posting on social media pilots are increasingly being seen in a similar light. Last November waiting for a delayed flight back to the UK, I overheard someone commenting that the pilot should be sacked for the plane being late, because he could just "go faster" to get there on time. And of course as with train drivers, the said passenger was convinced that they just told the autopilot on the craft what to do & then sit back.

 

[Starmill]

A train driver is no different and yet there seems to be more pressure on us to put up with this kind of thing.

I would argue that the pressure should be on the company to have better contingency in place. An increased spare drivers ratio for example, or a more effective forward planning service to move passengers by other means. It's unclear what actually happened in this case, or how long people were asked to wait for in the cold. I don't think anybody is or should be arguing that current company policy in relation to driver's hours, or the results of the Hidden report, shouldn't be followed.

 

[Gems]

Fairly sure the driver of the 2156 is a Leeds driver and a Skipton conductor. Not sure about his PNB timings, but Northern now take many diagrams up to the minute, so running out of hours is no surprise.
The driver then takes the 2247 from Skipton back to Leeds. There will be no SPT driver at Skipton, although a possibility there may have been a spare night shunt man.

It is no surprise this has happened, happens all the time as I highlighted in a post a few days ago. Northern don't care if they chuck passengers off no matter what the weather, nice and warm in a office in York isn't it.

 

[30907]

either the driver was already dangerously close to exceeding hours at Leeds, in which case why was the train allowed to start? (Would the passengers have been better off waiting at Leeds?), or he had enough in hand for the train to run as normal. And if he did run out at Shipley, why could the train run on to Skipton?

A lot we don't know but:
The driver worked the train back from Skipton (as a train had already run SKI-SHY it could have gone non stop that far, but that's another story).
The train was delayed outside SHY which may not have been anticipated before leaving LDS and the decision to run fast must have been made later.
The weather was cold but not freezing nor blowing a gale and Shipley P2 has a shelter.

 

[philthetube]

Also relevant in these situations, although not in this case is how fit the driver feels, bearing in mind he/she could be sleepy or hungry. I have insisted on a second person in the cab when feeling fatigued, not sure if this would be acceptable on the main line.

 

[JordR]

Long time listener, first time caller.

I was on 2H76 21:26 Leeds to Skipton yesterday. We came to a halt between Apperley Bridge station and Thackley Tunnel for some time, the guard told us this was due to the "train ahead breaking down" which seems consistent with a previous post on this thread.

When we got moving again after around 20 minutes the service then terminated in Shipley platform 4. We were asked to walk to another class 333 that was already sitting in platform 5, which the same driver and guard, and an additional staff member on board, then took forward to Skipton. It was mildly cold but I imagine we were standing on the platform for less than ten minutes.

I could see as the train pulled out of Shipley that there was another class 333 sitting in platform 2, presumably the broken down unit that we had been diverted around using the two trains in platforms 4 and 5?

After this earlier delay and considerable disruption could it simply be the case that 2H78 21:56 Leeds to Skipton was run fast because it was significantly delayed and out of place?

 

[cjmillsnun]

You can refuse to drive after twelve hours.

If you really want to be a d**k then you can refuse to drive after your booked day. Not many drivers I know would do this in this sort of situation.

If you’re going over twelve then you need authorisation. If they won’t authorise it then theres nothing you can do.

I suspect there’s a lot we don’t know about this particular event.

And I think this is the most pertinent post in this thread.

 

[mm333]

I was on that train as far as Shipley. There'd been a broken down train somewhere in the Shipley area (not sure where), things were in a mess, so as RTT shows, we were 36 late leaving Leeds and 56 late arriving at Shipley. While we were delayed on the approach to Shipley, the guard said that control were mooting detraining people at Shipley and possibly putting us into platform 3 (I presume to get us out of the way of the following Leeds-Skipton train). In the end, we pulled into p2 as normal. I got off and walked up to the front of p2, crossed the footbridge and walked back along p1 to leave by the McDonalds entrance. As I was walking down p1 (so some 2 minutes after those getting off at Shipley had disembarked), I saw people getting their belongings and getting off and other not moving.

 

[bb21]

Long time listener, first time caller.

I was on 2H76 21:26 Leeds to Skipton yesterday. We came to a halt between Apperley Bridge station and Thackley Tunnel for some time, the guard told us this was due to the "train ahead breaking down" which seems consistent with a previous post on this thread.

When we got moving again after around 20 minutes the service then terminated in Shipley platform 4. We were asked to walk to another class 333 that was already sitting in platform 5, which the same driver and guard, and an additional staff member on board, then took forward to Skipton. It was mildly cold but I imagine we were standing on the platform for less than ten minutes.

I could see as the train pulled out of Shipley that there was another class 333 sitting in platform 2, presumably the broken down unit that we had been diverted around using the two trains in platforms 4 and 5?

After this earlier delay and considerable disruption could it simply be the case that 2H78 21:56 Leeds to Skipton was run fast because it was significantly delayed and out of place?

Thank you.

It is rare to hear a truthful first-hand account on this forum. It certainly puts some of the ranting and bitching into perspective.

 

[30907]

Thank you.

It is rare to hear a truthful first-hand account on this forum. It certainly puts some of the ranting and bitching into perspective.

Yes, but it does refer to the previous train. Mm333 has done the same for the 2156 though.

 

[sheff1]

Thank you.

It is rare to hear a truthful first-hand account on this forum. It certainly puts some of the ranting and bitching into perspective.

Certainly useful, but it is not a first hand account of the train the thread is about but about a train nobody has mentioned before.

 

[bb21]

Yes, I realise that, but what it did show is that Northern did indeed have a plan (or at least did not take long to come up with a workable plan) for conveying these customers, as opposed to the impression some commentators gave that the customers were ignored and left to fend for themselves.

They may get lots of things wrong, but they do get some things right, and this probably is one that by the sound of things, while not ideal, they didn't manage to mess up.

 

[sheff1]

Yes it worked for the people on the 2126, but until we get a first hand account of someone who was travelling beyond Shipley on the 2156 we won't know whether Northern's plan worked for them as well ... although I have no reason to believe it did not.

What confuses me is the talk about the driver exceeding his hours, or needing a break, yet we are told that they drove on to Skipton and then back to Leeds with just a 3 minute turnround.

 

[Bantamzen]

Well the subsequent Leeds-Skipton due 22:42 that left at 23:13 does appear to have made it all stops to Skipton.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y52891/2019/01/23/advanced

 

[whhistle]

I know noone did in this case, but if this event happened and someone had died, or taken seriously ill, due to the cold, would the railway really say "We had no choice-Hidden Report.

That's where personal responsibility comes in.
Would you allow yourself to die? No.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I love this forum sometimes, we have gone from a detraining of some people in normal January Conditions to what if they had all frozen to death like in the film 'Day After Tomorrow'.....

No one here actually knows what happened, but Northern seem to be getting a lot of criticism!

 

[30907]

What confuses me is the talk about the driver exceeding his hours, or needing a break, yet we are told that they drove on to Skipton and then back to Leeds with just a 3 minute turnround.

Obviously s/he had just enough hours left to make it back to Leeds or depot before booking off.

 

[Tio Terry]

The Hidden Report made recommendations, it didn't pass laws.

The Law is the Safety Critical Work Regulations (1994). This makes allowances for exceptions in exceptional situations and this has been used in a very large number of circumstances - especially associated with over-running engineering works and exceptional weather conditions. Indeed, if every one of the staff employed within the Engineering Departments stuck rigidly to the letter of the law then delays would be much greater.

I don't know much about footplate grades or their attitude to working hours, I do know that it's not unusual for those involved in over-running engineering work to work beyond their rostered hours with no real problems.

Bearing in mind that the train appears to have continued it's journey and returned to Leeds, why couldn't it have run as a service train instead of ECS?

 

[Dieseldriver]

The Hidden Report made recommendations, it didn't pass laws.

The Law is the Safety Critical Work Regulations (1994). This makes allowances for exceptions in exceptional situations and this has been used in a very large number of circumstances - especially associated with over-running engineering works and exceptional weather conditions. Indeed, if every one of the staff employed within the Engineering Departments stuck rigidly to the letter of the law then delays would be much greater.

I don't know much about footplate grades or their attitude to working hours, I do know that it's not unusual for those involved in over-running engineering work to work beyond their rostered hours with no real problems.

Bearing in mind that the train appears to have continued it's journey and returned to Leeds, why couldn't it have run as a service train instead of ECS?

As a Train Driver who has, on numerous occasions exceeded my working hours quite considerably (on one occasion working in excess of 17 hours due to major disruption) trust me, the vast majority of traincrew are more than willing to go above and beyond to keep the service running. Apart from anything else, if I am driving a train 100 miles away from my depot in the middle of nowhere in the midst of a major signalling failure, major incident, fatality or extreme weather event, how do you propose I abandon my train on the running line (generally pretty frowned upon for obvious reasons) and take a 100 mile walk home? PNBs are always taken for the simple fact that our job demands sometimes quite intense concentration, ironically more so when working in times of severe disruption, carries a lot of responsibility/accountability if we get something wrong and, we don't have ready access to basic facilities such as kettles, microwaves, shops, Motorway service stations or even toilets when out and about.

 

[30907]

Bearing in mind that the train appears to have continued it's journey and returned to Leeds, why couldn't it have run as a service train instead of ECS?

AFAIK it ran in service but non stop. The return train called as booked.

 

[Tio Terry]

As a Train Driver who has, on numerous occasions exceeded my working hours quite considerably (on one occasion working in excess of 17 hours due to major disruption) trust me, the vast majority of traincrew are more than willing to go above and beyond to keep the service running. Apart from anything else, if I am driving a train 100 miles away from my depot in the middle of nowhere in the midst of a major signalling failure, major incident, fatality or extreme weather event, how do you propose I abandon my train on the running line (generally pretty frowned upon for obvious reasons) and take a 100 mile walk home? PNBs are always taken for the simple fact that our job demands sometimes quite intense concentration, ironically more so when working in times of severe disruption, carries a lot of responsibility/accountability if we get something wrong and, we don't have ready access to basic facilities such as kettles, microwaves, shops, Motorway service stations or even toilets when out and about.

I think maybe we are talking on crossed lines.

In my experience all the train crews I've worked with on Engineering trains have been what I call real railwaymen ( sorry, but I've never experienced a lady driver), they worked the hours the job required without any real concern - as you say. I've never, ever, suggested a driver should abandon a train and never would, I know real railway people don't do that sort of thing, if my post suggested that then I apologise unreservedly.

PNB's I fully understand, Engineering staff often find themselves "caught short" whilst in the middle of nowhere - one of my first jobs way back in the 1960's was to dig a hole for a telegraph pole stay which the Ganger promptly defecated in and told me to fill it in! - and not everywhere has welfare facilities, although provision is now far better than it was a decade ago.

I just find it odd that in this case the train didn't run as booked even if it was late.

 

[tiptoptaff]

I think maybe we are talking on crossed lines.

In my experience all the train crews I've worked with on Engineering trains have been what I call real railwaymen ( sorry, but I've never experienced a lady driver), they worked the hours the job required without any real concern - as you say. I've never, ever, suggested a driver should abandon a train and never would, I know real railway people don't do that sort of thing, if my post suggested that then I apologise unreservedly.

PNB's I fully understand, Engineering staff often find themselves "caught short" whilst in the middle of nowhere - one of my first jobs way back in the 1960's was to dig a hole for a telegraph pole stay which the Ganger promptly defecated in and told me to fill it in! - and not everywhere has welfare facilities, although provision is now far better than it was a decade ago.

I just find it odd that in this case the train didn't run as booked even if it was late.

It was engineering staff working long hours over a period of time that ultimately led to Clapham, and what the resulting report tried to address. If you're suggesting that this is flouted on a regular basis, then it's a strong case for sacking every single one of you, and your management.

 

[Tio Terry]

It was engineering staff working long hours over a period of time that ultimately led to Clapham, and what the resulting report tried to address. If you're suggesting that this is flouted on a regular basis, then it's a strong case for sacking every single one of you, and your management.

Firstly, I was part of Clapham, was there on the day, and am acutely aware of what the problems were.

Exceptional circumstances require exceptional responses. If engineering works over-run would you expect the site to be closed for around 12 hours until staff could return for another shift or for the staff to work an extra hour or two? It's not as if you have a spare shift of thirty or forty qualified engineers sitting in reserve is it? What about exceptional weather conditions? Sometimes staff cannot get home and their shift replacements can't get to the depot.

Nobody is suggesting regular flouting of the requirements, if you read my posts you will see they all relate to exceptional circumstances.

You can't sack me or my Management, I'm retired!

 

[Dieseldriver]

It was engineering staff working long hours over a period of time that ultimately led to Clapham, and what the resulting report tried to address. If you're suggesting that this is flouted on a regular basis, then it's a strong case for sacking every single one of you, and your management.

In fairness i don't think Tio Terry is referring to regularly working excessive hours. As he has said, it's in the case of exceptional circumstances, the same as when Drivers have to. Above all of this, anyone who felt overly tired or unfit to continue has the responsibility to declare this and should never be forced to continue (if they were then yes, I would want to see the manager pressurising them to be sacked).

 

[tiptoptaff]

I've managed a couple of very long engineering over-runs lately where we were waiting for rested staff to become available. I've also dealt with the disruption from extreme weather, and other large scale disruption. Even then, exceeding 12hours isn't all that common.

The impression I got from Tio Terry wasn't that it was under exceptional circumstances, but that it was regular occurrence to prevent over-runs. If that is happening on a regular basis, it needs dealing with, because it shouldn't be.

 

[Llanigraham]

I think maybe we are talking on crossed lines.

In my experience all the train crews I've worked with on Engineering trains have been what I call real railwaymen ( sorry, but I've never experienced a lady driver), they worked the hours the job required without any real concern - as you say. I've never, ever, suggested a driver should abandon a train and never would, I know real railway people don't do that sort of thing, if my post suggested that then I apologise unreservedly.

PNB's I fully understand, Engineering staff often find themselves "caught short" whilst in the middle of nowhere - one of my first jobs way back in the 1960's was to dig a hole for a telegraph pole stay which the Ganger promptly defecated in and told me to fill it in! - and not everywhere has welfare facilities, although provision is now far better than it was a decade ago.

I just find it odd that in this case the train didn't run as booked even if it was late.

I can think of a couple of occasions where a freight train had been "dumped" in a loop near my Box because the driver was running out of hours.