Daily Mail: train cancelled whilst guard is in sainsburys...

[455driver]

Fair enough, sorry for snapping.
Its just that it happens so often on here so people can 'make a point' that I have stopped taking it as an accident.

Cuddles all round!

 

[LateThanNever]

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I'm someone who works in IT and often works long hours & I can safely put my hand on my heart and say that long periods of work without a break, or a meal will almost always result in mistakes. I see it all the time, I've done it myself. Perhaps the evidence you've seen contradicts this, but then America isn't exactly a country with the finest record on working conditions. Maybe you want to look up how companies like Walmart operate in the US? There's a flip side to your evidence, and it isn't good reading.

And let's consider car driving for example, can you honestly say that it's a good idea to drive for many hours non-stop without a food or comfort break? The reason there are so many signs on motorways and other major routes telling you to "Take a break" is because fatigue has caused accidents, and has lead to loss of life. So is it really any different for train crews? Well actually yes, because they are responsible for sometimes hundreds of people on their services, so any accidents could be so much worse than on the roads. Therefore the Daily Wail really doesn't have a point, it simply wants to agitate it's rather easily lead readership into another "hate everybody for everything" state of mind.

Well aware of Walmart - that's why I do not shop at their now UK subsidiary, Asda - trust other people on here do not either.
However driving a motor vehicle is not the same as a train (see posts on this forum on how bus driving is more onerous). Rail - basically because of the rails, is inherently considerably safer than any other mode of transport with the possible exception of air.
Car drivers' hours are unregulated as are (in effect) LGV drivers' so fatigue is - there are no figures - more likely to be due to lack of sleep rather than lack of breaks.

My quick google search brings up this :
The Effects of Fatigue and Sleepiness on Nurse Performance and Patient Safety, Ann E. Rogers, Ph.D., R.N., F.A.A.N., associate professor, University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing, and the Center for Sleep and Respiratory Neurobiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

Interesting - they state that "Other studies however, have shown that rest breaks and tea breaks can decrease fatigue but not necessarily accident risk or errors" but in any case they do say that their "studies are orientated towards the effect of fatigue associated with insufficient sleep."
and indeed their studies cite:
night time flying - where basically they are on autopilot and just on standby so nothing happens - they're on permanent break!
repetitive strain injury in fast data entry which is not comparable to train driving;
accident risk in a large engineering company where breaks within every two hours were recommended - might have implications for Network Rail but not for driving a train!

 

[PG]

The only way to improve safety over DOO is to have 2 fully safety critical staff on board, the ticket examiners on the A&B are no more useful in an emergency than any other passenger.

I am not taking anything away from the job they do but they are not safety critical and so cannot go trackside or anything like that. Although they are supposed to help out to evacuate the train etc they are not formally trained in it and for me it is a copout, If I am not trained in something then I wont be doing it because if anything goes wrong who will be in the firing line? Where there is blame there is a claim!

Witness the incident at Desborough where a door came open on a Meridian between stations and the train manager requested the customer host to operate the emergency brake handle. The customer host had difficulty operating the handle but thought she had managed it on the second attempt as the train braked to a stand whereas the driver had realised the problem at that stage and applied the brakes. Investigation revealed that the training customer hosts received did not include practical application of the emergency brake handles.

 

[Tomnick]

However driving a motor vehicle is not the same as a train (see posts on this forum on how bus driving is more onerous). Rail - basically because of the rails, is inherently considerably safer than any other mode of transport with the possible exception of air.

You don't need to steer a train, but equally you can bring a bus to a stand within a matter of metres. I wouldn't want a tired driver, who'd been working continuously for ten hours, in either case. Yes, the train driver isn't going to veer off the road into an oncoming vehicle, but he might briefly lose concentration and forget what the last signal was displaying, or confuse his current position and fail to brake for a speed restriction, or fail to understand a complicated set of instructions being passed by the signal, or...various other scenarios. I still find it difficult to comprehend that folk are arguing that traincrew don't need breaks!

 

[LateThanNever]

You don't need to steer a train, but equally you can bring a bus to a stand within a matter of metres. I wouldn't want a tired driver, who'd been working continuously for ten hours, in either case. Yes, the train driver isn't going to veer off the road into an oncoming vehicle, but he might briefly lose concentration and forget what the last signal was displaying, or confuse his current position and fail to brake for a speed restriction, or fail to understand a complicated set of instructions being passed by the signal, or...various other scenarios. I still find it difficult to comprehend that folk are arguing that traincrew don't need breaks!

Not arguing that! Just that the evidence doesn't support that they always need breaks and the evidence particularly doesn't seem to support eating on a break!
Sleep, yes, and that is what is important - if they took a nap on a break the evidence is very largely in favour but not in favour of a break in Sainsbury's!

 

[Tomnick]

When do they eat then?! Being hungry because you've not eaten for ten or eleven hours is hardly conducive to maintaining good concentration. Some might prefer to pop over to Sainsbury's (other supermarkets available) for the fresh air, and I'm sure some do sleep!

 

[LateThanNever]

Witness the incident at Desborough where a door came open on a Meridian between stations and the train manager requested the customer host to operate the emergency brake handle. The customer host had difficulty operating the handle but thought she had managed it on the second attempt as the train braked to a stand whereas the driver had realised the problem at that stage and applied the brakes. Investigation revealed that the training customer hosts received did not include practical application of the emergency brake handles.

A customer host is surely a glorified air hostess all of whom are trained - this should be a hint!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

When do they eat then?! Being hungry because you've not eaten for ten or eleven hours is hardly conducive to maintaining good concentration. Some might prefer to pop over to Sainsbury's (other supermarkets available) for the fresh air, and I'm sure some do sleep!

Yea, but not Asda...
Remarkably, science suggests otherwise - for concentration - provided days are c.8hrs. In any case you could (dangerously) be eating on the job.

 

[JohnB57]

I see that the member of the rail staff in the OP was visiting Sainsbury's. Do any ever visit Waitrose....or even Fortnum and Mason..

Unlikely. As Alan Coren once said "Sainsburys exists to keep the riff-raff out of Waitrose"

 

[PG]

A customer host is surely a glorified air hostess all of whom are trained - this should be a hint!

I fail to see the relevance of this when my post was in support of what 455driver was saying.

 

[Harbon 1]

Not arguing that! Just that the evidence doesn't support that they always need breaks and the evidence particularly doesn't seem to support eating on a break!
Sleep, yes, and that is what is important - if they took a nap on a break the evidence is very largely in favour but not in favour of a break in Sainsbury's!

Why is it such a problem using the break time away from the train you have to run a few errands or grab some lunch or a drink?

 

[LateThanNever]

Why is it such a problem using the break time away from the train you have to run a few errands or grab some lunch or a drink?

It's not of course - it is just how much the concomicant delay of your customer/passenger is justified!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Unlikely. As Alan Coren once said "Sainsburys exists to keep the riff-raff out of Waitrose"

And I hope there is neither in Holmfirth! No Lodges I know...

 

[AndyPJG]

Not arguing that! Just that the evidence doesn't support that they always need breaks and the evidence particularly doesn't seem to support eating on a break!
Sleep, yes, and that is what is important - if they took a nap on a break the evidence is very largely in favour but not in favour of a break in Sainsbury's!

Might be a diabetic (or similar condition) that require regular meals/food to safely maintain their performance and concentration levels.

 

[LateThanNever]

Might be a diabetic (or similar condition) that require regular meals/food to safely maintain their performance and concentration levels.

Might be but I'm sure if the detail of Sainsbury was mentioned so too would diabetes. Indeed I'm not sure that a diabetic condition is appropriate for a guard..

 

[Tomnick]

I'm not diabetic, but I'd still be struggling by 2000 if I'd booked on at 1200 and hadn't eaten since! I don't think diabetes, properly controlled, is or should be a problem for a driver or guard though. I'm still far from convinced that a break from a role that requires substantial and near-continuous levels of concentration is a bad thing in any way though!

 

[PG]

Might be but I'm sure if the detail of Sainsbury was mentioned so too would diabetes. Indeed I'm not sure that a diabetic condition is appropriate for a guard..

Might be wise to check your assumptions...

Will save you the leg work and point you here.

 

[fowler9]

A customer host is surely a glorified air hostess all of whom are trained - this should be a hint!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Yea, but not Asda...
Remarkably, science suggests otherwise - for concentration - provided days are c.8hrs. In any case you could (dangerously) be eating on the job.

What is a glorified air hostess? Cabin crew need to know a fair bit about the aircraft they are flying on and have to pass tests a damn sight more often than the idiots we allow on our roads.

 

[BestWestern]

A customer host is surely a glorified air hostess all of whom are trained - this should be a hint!

Yea, but not Asda...
Remarkably, science suggests otherwise - for concentration - provided days are c.8hrs. In any case you could (dangerously) be eating on the job.

An air hostess is more akin to the role of a Guard, but with additional catering remit! A customer host is not safety critical, doesn't have any emergency training in most cases, and doesn't need to because there is a Guard who does that!

As for 'eating dangerously', yes all those donuts can be terribly bad for one's arteries....Or are you seriously trying to make a veiled sugggestion along the lines that eating at any point during a shift should be banned altogether on safety grounds, or somesuch clumsy twaddle? One might equally be dangerously picking one's nose or scratching one's ar*e! (Assuming one isn't too busy talking out of it...)

 

[A-driver]

Not arguing that! Just that the evidence doesn't support that they always need breaks and the evidence particularly doesn't seem to support eating on a break!

Sleep, yes, and that is what is important - if they took a nap on a break the evidence is very largely in favour but not in favour of a break in Sainsbury's!

I'll tell you what'latethannever', rather than continually trying to argue your non existent points with studies you have found online after a quick google why not try doing the job for a bit and seeing how fatigue ACTUALLY works for train drivers and guards. You may then have a valid point to put across.

Failing that try listening to those of use who spend our entire working lives working in the jobs as we do know what we are talking about and I can assure you that taking the breaks discussed makes a world of difference to the safe operation of trains. 5 hours constant driving on a train is absolutely knackering. The last leg can be very difficult. You constantly have to try and force yourself to concentrate, braking curves for stations can be all over the place etc and I would never feel comfortable continuing after the 5 hours to do another trip taking me up to 7 or 8 hours.

And as for eating,my really think that I would be better off getting to work at 0430 and not having a meal break until I finish work at 1300? Get real! The first thing you are told to do to boost concentration is to have something to eat and I assure you it works very well, and that isn't some study I have found online telling me that, it is my first hand experience of doing it and that of my colleagues.

Forget what your "studies" tell you as they are worth nothing compared to actual first hand experience. Although I'm guessing you won't take any of that on board as you evidently have a bee in your bonet about rail staff and just like to spout rubbish making us t to be lazy and militant. I can't actually believe that you are still posting on this thread as if you actually have a valid point to make...you are still just making a fool out of yourself by ignoring the posts by those of us who do the job everyday and can tell you first hand what fatigue is like for drivers and guards!

 

[bystander]

Those of us who actually work in the job do, obviously, have more of an insight into what it entails, its stresses, strains and rules, than those who do not.

However, it is all too easy for staff to fall into the unedifying trap of (1) defending the status quo at all costs, simply because it is the status quo; and (2) refusing to countenance any other point of view, because it cannot be valid if it does not come from a serving, line-toeing member of staff.

As I've said, I'm a high speed driver and a lot of what A-driver and others say is true. However a lot of it isn't - or needn't be. The railway industry is one of the most badly managed, archaic, cowardly, inward looking and stale, particularly when it comes to change management and innovation in working practices, that I've ever encountered.

Regards,

B

 

[Monty]

The job has a detrimental effect on your health by it's very nature because of working hours and the times of day you are expected to eat. Some people may be prepared to cut short their PNB or skip it altogether during disruption. I will not, as the sole provider for my family I have far too much to loose by throwing away my job after having an accident at work because of fatigue. The vast majority of our jobs are well over nine hours, and are often extending up too eleven during disruption or if we are doing cross cover. We need respite and we need time to eat a meal and do our ablutions.

 

[ComUtoR]

... or needn't be. The railway industry is one of the most badly managed, archaic, cowardly, inward looking and stale, particularly when it comes to change management and innovation in working practices, that I've ever encountered.

+1
Q.E.D
100%
Nail, Hammer, Head

 

[jimbo99]

I think these stories only work because they tie in with people's experience. Normal users have had some experience of railway officiousness (grumpy staff, weird ticketing rules, doors being closed in their face because it's 30 secs before ETD only for the next one to be running late etc etc) and inconsistant application of rules/behaviour of staff. For many it's a distress purchase (they have no choice).

That might all be unfair, but that's the way some people see the railway service. Stories such as this play to that willing audience.

The answer is not to fiddle with necessary safety rules. Rather it's to try and make the experience more user-friendly for joe public. Easier said than done of course. Then they'll take a different view of stories such as this and be more forgiving when things do go wrong. Those joe publics that do have a good railway experience won't take stories like this seriously.

 

[LowLevel]

I will say you've hit the nail on the head with the first part of the post - badly managed. The staff have no confidence in the managers and the managers have little to no knowledge of how to inspire said confidence in their staff, along with no knowledge of the skill that is change management.

What I've seen from some of mine over the last few years beggars belief.

 

[A-driver]

Those of us who actually work in the job do, obviously, have more of an insight into what it entails, its stresses, strains and rules, than those who do not.



However, it is all too easy for staff to fall into the unedifying trap of (1) defending the status quo at all costs, simply because it is the status quo; and (2) refusing to countenance any other point of view, because it cannot be valid if it does not come from a serving, line-toeing member of staff.



As I've said, I'm a high speed driver and a lot of what A-driver and others say is true. However a lot of it isn't - or needn't be. The railway industry is one of the most badly managed, archaic, cowardly, inward looking and stale, particularly when it comes to change management and innovation in working practices, that I've ever encountered.



Regards,



B

I don't disagree with any if that but I think the debate over weather of not breaks should be taken is different. No one can honestly believe it's acceptable to drive trains for 10hours straight with no break. I agree the 30min rule 'to the second' is a little much but it's not down to staff, it's down to the way the blame culture works and is about covering yourself.

 

[bystander]

No, I don't disagree with that at all either!

 

[Flamingo]

Might be but I'm sure if the detail of Sainsbury was mentioned so too would diabetes. Indeed I'm not sure that a diabetic condition is appropriate for a guard..

Well, if the opinion of their DR and the company Dr is that they are fit to work with reasonable adjustments (that they take their mandated breaks), they are fit to work.

Or are you just trolling? Again?

 

[455driver]

Are we sure that the guard seen in the supermarket is the same guard that should have been working the train?

It could well have been another guard!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Or are you just trolling? Again?

Is there a prize for guessing the right answer!

 

[Dieseldriver]

I have just read this thread the whole way through. Speaking as a train driver I must say I am absolutely disgusted in myself that I have any form of break at work whatsoever. Thinking about it now I can't believe how selfish I have been, I sometimes even go to the toilet when I change ends, thank God I saw this thread, otherwise I would have just gone through the rest of my career like this.
All traincrew on this thread, if you take your PNBs, if you make use of a toilet at any point during your shift or even worse, dare to eat I hope you are also all deeply ashamed of yourselves, I know I am.
I suppose next time I am at the controls of a 400 tonne, 90mph train with near on 1000 people on board I will have to cross my legs desperate for the toilet, be excessively hungry due to upholding my new found principles of never eating at work and dangerously fatigued. At least then I will be providing my passengers (who personally pay me my wages) with the best customer service ever

 

[Lockwood]

Are we sure that the guard seen in the supermarket is the same guard that should have been working the train?

It could well have been another guard!

They're all interchangeable. You could pick up any guard and just plop them into any train!
Or grab you to do it. Pressing a button and looking at coloured lights isn't that hard, so walking up and down asking to see tickets and pressing the "ding ding" button can't be much of a stretch?



This is a JOKE

 

[PG]

I'll tell you what'latethannever', rather than continually trying to argue your non existent points with studies you have found online after a quick google why not try doing the job for a bit and seeing how fatigue ACTUALLY works for train drivers and guards. You may then have a valid point to put across.

Failing that try listening to those of use who spend our entire working lives working in the jobs as we do know what we are talking about and I can assure you that taking the breaks discussed makes a world of difference to the safe operation of trains. 5 hours constant driving on a train is absolutely knackering. The last leg can be very difficult. You constantly have to try and force yourself to concentrate, braking curves for stations can be all over the place etc and I would never feel comfortable continuing after the 5 hours to do another trip taking me up to 7 or 8 hours.

And as for eating,my really think that I would be better off getting to work at 0430 and not having a meal break until I finish work at 1300? Get real! The first thing you are told to do to boost concentration is to have something to eat and I assure you it works very well, and that isn't some study I have found online telling me that, it is my first hand experience of doing it and that of my colleagues.

Forget what your "studies" tell you as they are worth nothing compared to actual first hand experience. Although I'm guessing you won't take any of that on board as you evidently have a bee in your bonet about rail staff and just like to spout rubbish making us t to be lazy and militant. I can't actually believe that you are still posting on this thread as if you actually have a valid point to make...you are still just making a fool out of yourself by ignoring the posts by those of us who do the job everyday and can tell you first hand what fatigue is like for drivers and guards!

+1
While I have tried responding to 'latethannever' 'in-kind' by using studies etc since they are so keen to use them themselves they certainly are not the be-all and end-all.
Nothing like hearing from the folk 'on the ground' who do the job day-in day-out, and I think they are best placed to make judgements and tell us what it is like.

In my own field us 'foot soldiers' are left to do the best we can with systems/infrastructure/policies/procedures put in place by those who have little idea of the day-to-day reality but are all too ready to 'hang us out to dry' at the first opportunity!