Late train further delayed by rest break

[ComUtoR]

My understanding is that it is not a legal requirement to take your PNB when scheduled.

Correct. The legal requirement is that you have to have a break and you cannot work for more than x hrs. Ergo my comment on flexibility earlier. Sheduled breaks can easily be missed if you meet the legal requirement and can have a break later. That may also affect another service because diagrams are too tight. Sacrifice one service for another ? That is certainly NOT your decision and is down to control. You may want to forgo our break and are willing to take it later but control state otherwise. It's a catch 22 situation.

However the consequences of not doing so *may* land you in legal hot water if you are subsequently involved in a serious safety of the line incident and *will* result in you being allocated the lion's share of the blame for any such incident.

Its odd because whilst you do meet the legal requirement it still becomes an issue and will 100% be mentioned during an incident. Breaks are often placed on a diagram to meet fatigue requirements and skipping expected meal breaks can lead to distraction (thinking about your break rather than driving etc.) Again your in a catch 22 because you know in your head that you may not get it later, or any incident it becomes a salient point of investigation. I always say to colleagues that you absolute must ensure you are well rested and your break that gets deferred is 100% taken later in the diagram. Remember you may be involved in a delay and your break pushed further back. Again, it is a factor to consider.

Skipping/delaying your PNB for additional pay is therefore a personal decision which must be carefully made, with reference too your own assessment of whether your performance is likely to be significantly impaired by not taking the break. It is essentially a decision that comes down to professional judgement.

Only at certain times. As pointed out by others already. When you reach that critical point where you are REQUIRED to take a break then you cannot give that up for remittance of any sort. At that point it is a legal and safety critical responsibility. Professional judgement is to not take the service. Work safe ALWAYS

 

[talltim]

So, having a PNB at the scheduled time is not a legal requirement. Having a PNB after working a certain amount of time is.
Choosing to forgo a break that is scheduled before you have reached your time limit for working is legal, but you have to bear in mind the next time you may be able to have a break and make sure that you don't reach the limit of hours worked continuously before you can.
You also have a duty to make sure that you are sufficiently alert and rested to work safely.
As an example, say you have worked 5 hours and the maximum you are allowed to work without a break is 7 hours*. Your train has terminated and you are scheduled a PNB. However the train was late in and ideally needs to be turned around in 5 mins. Although you have 2 hours remaining before you legally require a PNB, the service is three hours long so if you just set off ASAP, you would have to halt the train 2/3s of the way through the journey for your PNB. So, to comply with the law AND cause least disruption it's best to have the PNB before setting off.


*figures are made up for the sake of the example

 

[Tomnick]

Whilst being in full agreement that traincrew are perfectly entitled to, and should, take their PNB when required even if that delays a train, is a PNB at all a legal requirement? We've already heard that TMs on some TOCs aren't rostered PNBs and are expected to find time to take breaks on the train, and, likewise, signalmen in most single-manned locations don't have a proper break in anything up to 12 hours. I've always understood that the provision of PNBs, and the finer details of when they must be rostered and taken, is a matter of risk assessment and fatigue management within each TOC and local agreement between the TOCs and the unions (all taking the Hidden recommendations into account), and that transport workers are actually exempt from the legal right to a break during the working day (bus and lorry drivers having specific legislation to adher to). Please do correct me if I'm wrong!

 

[Flamingo]

All turns are different. As an example, I was on a turn a few weeks ago, where I was scheduled a PNB four hours fifty minutes into the job. However, the first two hours forty minutes of the job were travelling / sitting on an empty stock drinking tea. So when I was late into London, although it was five hours forty minutes into the turn, I had only been working for two hours fifty minutes.

If I took my next train out on time (five minutes after arrival), that journey was one hour forty-five, so when I had a break I would be well within six hours of when I started "working" (as opposed to signing on). I had spent the last twenty minutes of the run into London sitting in the TGS having a cuppa and a biscuit, and it was the same set, so no prep needed, and as we were late I had gone through with a bin-bag and cleaned it before sitting down with a cuppa.

Therefore I was happy that although I was technically missing my PNB, it was a situation where I was not compromising safety by doing so. I was very politely asked if I was willing to do this by several people, which I happily agreed to. No money changed hands.

It was helped by the fact that the first train had been comfortably loaded, and I had not had to have any arguments over First Class standees or any other issues that might have stressed me out.

 

[talltim]

I'm impressed that you can make a biscuit last 20 minutes....

 

[Flamingo]

I'm impressed that you can make a biscuit last 20 minutes....

Who said it was one? I started with a full box of complementary shortbread packets, and stood up twenty minutes later brushing the crumbs and mound of empty wrappers off my lap...

 

[313103]

I know for example that FGW Train Managers often have no PNB at their designated point ie in my area Swansea, if a down service is more then 30 minutes late the train Manager will often forgo the PNB because of the now tight turn around at Swansea and we will often see them on the next up service.

I have often wondered if this is the case that should a operating incident involving said manager how the company would react? Would they support the individual? Would they leave them out to dry? The book would certainly be thrown at them and it will be the union (if they are in one) to pick up the pieces. The reason why I ask this is because they are still doing a safety operating role amongst all the other stuff they do, yet where do you get a break after leaving Swansea? (perhaps a FGW TM could put me right on this).

When I was a Guard unless we were actually stuck in a certain location I would also have my PNB at the designated location. If we was stuck it would take place as soon as I got to a designated PNB facility.

 

[LBSCR Times]

It seems clear to me that the failure in this and similar situations lies with the TOC Control. They know drivers & guards have to take their PNBs; they know which trains are delayed; they have access to the driver & guards diagrams. What they so often fail to do is to draw on these resources in order to make the correct, proactive decisions, i.e. anticipate the problem and forewarn the staff at the affected station so the delay information can be passed to the passengers and displayed in a timely manner on information systems.
I'm not necessarily knocking individual TOC control staff - it may well be that they are under-resourced/overworked - but the problem undoubtedly resides at control level.

No, the problem lies in all the inconsistencies in the rail industry.
How can Control be proactive when no two circumstances are the same.
I can quote many instances of where they have recovered the service for a right time start and then platform staff say there are two drivers on the train, because one decided to forgo their PNB. The fact it was their last train on their duty might have had a bearing on it was purely coincidental.....
On many occasions this is why trains run fast etc.
And usually there is only one Controller to cover a vast network, as they have been cut back too. And when it is busy a Controller doesn't get a break for a meal, having to sit at their panel working and eating too. Hardly good for their health either, so they get stressed as well.

 

[Flamingo]

I know for example that FGW Train Managers often have no PNB at their designated point ie in my area Swansea, if a down service is more then 30 minutes late the train Manager will often forgo the PNB because of the now tight turn around at Swansea and we will often see them on the next up service.

I have often wondered if this is the case that should a operating incident involving said manager how the company would react? Would they support the individual? Would they leave them out to dry? The book would certainly be thrown at them and it will be the union (if they are in one) to pick up the pieces. The reason why I ask this is because they are still doing a safety operating role amongst all the other stuff they do, yet where do you get a break after leaving Swansea? (perhaps a FGW TM could put me right on this).

When I was a Guard unless we were actually stuck in a certain location I would also have my PNB at the designated location. If we was stuck it would take place as soon as I got to a designated PNB facility.

They might be only taking a train back to Cardiff or Bristol, there are turns where this happens and the PNB is not in Swansea.

 

[313103]

They might be only taking a train back to Cardiff or Bristol, there are turns where this happens and the PNB is not in Swansea.

Ahh thanks for that, of course I know most of the Swansea TMs but the other crews is only occasional. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[AngusH]

And usually there is only one Controller to cover a vast network, as they have been cut back too. And when it is busy a Controller doesn't get a break for a meal, having to sit at their panel working and eating too. Hardly good for their health either, so they get stressed as well.

I'm curious, is the financial saving here actually worth it? I would have thought the saving somewhat marginal, compared to the downsides...

 

[HSTEd]

Of course if we had an integrated railway it would be far easier to arrange for reserve drivers.

 

[notadriver]

Of course if we had an integrated railway it would be far easier to arrange for reserve drivers.

How so ?

 

[Flamingo]

How so ?

Because a driver sitting spare in Newcastle could be sent to cover a turn in Swansea, of course! How did you not know that!

 

[drbdrb]

So, having a PNB at the scheduled time is not a legal requirement. Having a PNB after working a certain amount of time is.

Would be interesting to read the legislation that set out these fixed times.

if a down service is more then 30 minutes late the train Manager will often forgo the PNB because of the now tight turn around at Swansea and we will often see them on the next up service.

I have often wondered if this is the case that should a operating incident involving said manager how the company would react? Would they support the individual? Would they leave them out to dry? The book would certainly be thrown at them and it will be the union (if they are in one) to pick up the pieces.

Why/how could the book be thrown at them.

The train company knew the time the train manager started
The train company knew the time the train manager took their breaks
The train company knew the time their train arrived
The train company knows the is not sufficient time to take a break

If it was dangerous why would the train company authorise that train manager to manage that train?

The person at fault is not the person who has not taken their break, but the person that authorised them to continue in that role *knowing* they had not taken their break.

 

[HSTEd]

How so ?

Notwithstanding Flamingo's Sarcasm - most trains out of most mainline termini are operated over largely the same route.
For instance all but one of the IC departures out of Kings Cross use the same track out as far as Doncaster (and the one that doesn't only deviates for the last ten miles). At that point you can probably arrange a crew swap with a southbound train for example.

This means you are far more likely to have other drivers/guards with the correct paperwork available to take a train out.
Hull Trains/Grand Central having another driver sitting around for a handul of trains per day simply isn't viable.

 

[ValleyLines142]

Similarly, I tweeted Hull Trains to ask about the reason for the delay, saying I knew about the level crossing issue, but asking why had the train been further delayed at Kings Cross. I got a reply stating that the train had been delayed due to the level crossing incident, entirely missing the point of what my query asked!?

On Twitter, many TOC's accounts try to make you look stupid, and go completely off on a tangent! First Great Western are buggers for it!

 

[BestWestern]

Would be interesting to read the legislation that set out these fixed times.



Why/how could the book be thrown at them.

The train company knew the time the train manager started
The train company knew the time the train manager took their breaks
The train company knew the time their train arrived
The train company knows the is not sufficient time to take a break

If it was dangerous why would the train company authorise that train manager to manage that train?

The person at fault is not the person who has not taken their break, but the person that authorised them to continue in that role *knowing* they had not taken their break.

If only it worked in such common sense terms in the real world. The get-out clause is that wonderful form of delegating/buck passing, 'personal responsibility'.

 

[Jamesb1974]

Would be interesting to read the legislation that set out these fixed times.

https://www.gov.uk/rest-breaks-work/overview

Rest breaks

12.—(1) Where an adult worker’s daily working time is more than six hours, he is entitled to a rest break.

(2) The details of the rest break to which an adult worker is entitled under paragraph (1), including its duration and the terms on which it is granted, shall be in accordance with any provisions for the purposes of this regulation which are contained in a collective agreement or a workforce agreement.

(3) Subject to the provisions of any applicable collective agreement or workforce agreement, the rest break provided for in paragraph (1) is an uninterrupted period of not less than 20 minutes, and the worker is entitled to spend it away from his workstation if he has one.

The 'Hidden regulations' (named after Anthony Hidden QC who chaired the independent inquiry into the Clapham rail crash) found that excessive fatigue played a significant part in causing the crash. The technician who left the signal wiring in position that caused the false feed and then the crash, had worked a seven day week for the previous thirteen weeks.

As a result of the inquiry, the 'Hidden regulations' which looked at fatigue and shift lengths came into place. This has been superseded by individual TOCs and FOCs being given guidance and good practice advice from RSSB which recommends the following in respect to rest breaks for staff carrying out safety critical roles. The individual companies have 'Fatigue indexes' and each turn/diagram/job is compiled against the fatigue index.

Following a review of SPAD incidents, research findings recommend a maximum period of work of four hours before a break of 15 minutes which is completely free of all work-related activities [3]. The
HSE recommended good practice limit is three hours.

And

To maximise the beneficial effects of breaks it is important to consider their timing within a shift. Scheduling breaks at the start or end of a shift reduces any beneficial effects. Ideally breaks should be scheduled towards the middle of a shift or at a suitable time with regard to task activities.

It is important they allow the opportunity to relax, away from work interruptions, and provide access to adequate rest facilities, including food and drink. The facility to take a short nap during a break can also be effective in controlling the build up of fatigue, particularly for safety critical workers on the night shift
(see section 7.4.3 for more detail).

The bottom line is that no TOC or FOC wants to see their staff fatigued to the extent that they cause a major disaster/loss of life that could have been avoided by simply planning in some breaks, in accordance with research findings.

This http://www.raib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/110815_R152011_Shap_Summit.pdf (although not related to passenger workings) actually gives a really good example of how fatigue can cause incidents. While it doesn't specifically refer to a lack of breaks being the cause of the incident, it is easy to see how fitting sufficient break periods into a shift can be of benefit.

Point 64 of the report states

A well-designed shift system reduces absenteeism, sickness, staff turnover, compensation claims and lost-time incidents; it also reduces the likelihood of fatigue-related accidents and their costs. DB Schenker estimated that the cost of the Brentingby derailment was approximately £50,000 plus the costs associated with replacing the driver who resigned after the accident.

 

[TUC]

All of which might be more relevant if we were talking about drivers, who 99% of the time have an infiniety more safety critical role.

 

[A-driver]

Makes no different if driver, guard, platform staff, Shunter-all perform a safety critical
Job and need to take brakes.

 

[Jamesb1974]

All of which might be more relevant if we were talking about drivers, who 99% of the time have an infiniety more safety critical role.

Fatigue and fatigue indexing is applicable to ALL safety critical staff.

The .Gov advice is applicable to ALL workers.

RSSB guidance is also applicable to ALL safety critical staff.

The last part was included (as I clearly pointed out) as an example of how fatigue affects safety critical staff (in that example it was a driver).

I tried to provide an answer to your question with solid evidence. If you don't want to see it or you want to consider it irrelevant, then i really cannot help you any further except to advise you to remove your blinkers.

 

[TUC]

It might apply to all but, bearing in mind the flexibility that is set out in the guidance quoted above, the reality is that different judgements will be relevant for different staff at different times.

 

[HowardGWR]

Makes no different if driver, guard, platform staff, Shunter-all perform a safety critical
Job and need to take brakes.

Well, they should give them back.

 

[Greenback]

As has been mentioned and discussed int his thread already.

 

[A-driver]

It might apply to all but, bearing in mind the flexibility that is set out in the guidance quoted above, the reality is that different judgements will be relevant for different staff at different times.

How do you know no flexibility was shown? How do you know the guard could take a break any other time? Chances are that hull-London-hull without a break would go way over his time so there is little alternative. Having a break on the train isn't acceptable and would certainly put a guard in hot water if investigated for an incident.

I don't know why you are making such a big thing out of this...it's a VERY common think for safety critical breaks to cause service disruption bit to be honest that is to be expected when TOCs are so desperate to tighten diagrams up as much as they can to increase productivity. We have diagrams with 32mins to take a 30 min pnb. Arrive 4 mins late and your next train MUST depart 2 min late. In the rush hour at kings x that will cost you a path and that 2min late start easily tops 5min once a path has been found.

If it's a choice of delaying a few hundred punters or potentially leaving myself open to disciplinary or even criminal proceedings then I can't see how anyone could argue that the delay is worse. Would you honestly expect a staff member to risk potential dismissal or prosecution to get you home on time?!

 

[rmt4ever]

Here is question which I'd be interested to hear non-railway passengers, and railway staff's views on.

Scenario: Suburban/Metro rail route of say journey time of 45mins-1 hour. Driver is on a diagram of say 4 hours before rostered break. At terminus roughly halfway through that 4 hour stint, driver has booked terminus turnaround of 14 minutes before departure time back in the opposite direction. Train is running late due to congestion/signal failure/whatever, and arrives 11 minutes late. Train-crew could easily turn the train around in 3 minutes, ready for another journey of probably the same length, but wants a pee, cup of tea, cigarette or combination of these. He rings signaller and takes the booked turnaround of 14 minutes to do said things.....

Delays the train obviously for the next working. What do people think about this? Is it acceptable?

Just interested to hear peoples views, I know what mine is

 

[drbdrb]

If only it worked in such common sense terms in the real world. The get-out clause is that wonderful form of delegating/buck passing, 'personal responsibility'.

So you are saying that the train manager's employer can pretend not to know their illegal behaviour not taking a break, even though they must know it occurred because they sanctioned the train leaving at a particular time with them on board.

They would get laughed out of court

Makes no different if driver, guard, platform staff, Shunter-all perform a safety critical Job and need to take brakes.

So in the Kings Cross fun and games this Christmas, why was it only the drivers ran out of hours?

Were none of the other jobs being performed safety critical?

 

[A-driver]

Here is question which I'd be interested to hear non-railway passengers, and railway staff's views on.

Scenario: Suburban/Metro rail route of say journey time of 45mins-1 hour. Driver is on a diagram of say 4 hours before rostered break. At terminus roughly halfway through that 4 hour stint, driver has booked terminus turnaround of 14 minutes before departure time back in the opposite direction. Train is running late due to congestion/signal failure/whatever, and arrives 11 minutes late. Train-crew could easily turn the train around in 3 minutes, ready for another journey of probably the same length, but wants a pee, cup of tea, cigarette or combination of these. He rings signaller and takes the booked turnaround of 14 minutes to do said things.....

Delays the train obviously for the next working. What do people think about this? Is it acceptable?

Just interested to hear peoples views, I know what mine is

Don't see that happening. To turn around a 3,4 or 6 car train takes 5mins. The timetable sometimes gives us longer. So I may have a 20min turnaround but if I'm 15min late in I can theoretically turn around on time. If I'm 18 late in then chances are I'll be 3 late back out. Timetabled times are different to practical turnaround times.

As for making tea/using loo during turnaround it's a case by case really. If I need the loo I will go during a turnaround regardless or how much time I have. If I'm booked a 5min turnaround and using the loo will delay a train then so be it, it's far more important than running to time. Most drivers plan for long stints and have a flask of hot water or tea so making drinks during a turnaround isn't necessary. That said, on a hot day grabbing a drink during a turnaround can be very important and again could take priority over punctuality. If it's going to affect the drivers ability to safely work the train then a delay is definitely acceptable.

 

[A-driver]

So you are saying that the train manager's employer can pretend not to know their illegal behaviour not taking a break, even though they must know it occurred because they sanctioned the train leaving at a particular time with them on board.

They would get laughed out of court



So in the Kings Cross fun and games this Christmas, why was it only the drivers ran out of hours?

Were none of the other jobs being performed safety critical?

At a guess it was due to the drivers having less flexibility in the diagram they were on compared to the other workers on site. But being that I wasn't there I wouldn't know exact details.