Traincrew Shortage Poach-A-Thon?

[Economist]

It appears quite a few TOCs seem to be experiencing traincrew shortages/massive turnover of staff. I've noticed on the ASLEF Company Information page there's about 20 TOCs/FOCs with new pay deals coming up in April-August next year. I don't know if the traincrew shortage is affecting guards as well but does anyone think we'll see some TOCs attempting a massive hike in terms to stop people leaving/attract people from other TOCs?

 

[2L70]

Doesn’t really happen with on board staff unless it’s an new TOC/Depot starting out. LNER took a couple from TPE for their new Doncaster Depot.

Companies want to train their own staff not have qualified people.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Companies want to train their own staff not have qualified people.

Yes. They want to employ inexperienced staff that can be brainwashed. Experience and knowledge seems to be frowned upon these days.
Unfortunately, in my experience, it is these newer brainwashed staff that seem to be the most militant and unwilling to be useful

 

[Starmill]

They want to employ inexperienced staff that can be brainwashed. Experience and knowledge seems to be frowned upon these days.

Normally in recruitment you're looking to hire someone you think you can get along with, who will be directed by the needs of management and cohesive with their new colleagues. You're not looking for someone who already knows how to do the job you need to be done, because they probably don't exist. Worse, you need to avoid people who think they already know what the job calls for, who are set in their old ways and who will do the job in the way they think it should be done, not yours.

This hardly means experience isn't relevant. Quite the opposite to my mind. Usually, varied experience is more valuable than a narrower and deeper field.

In the railway context this could easily mean that someone who has spent time working on the platform or in a ticket office, and then as a guard, is a better fit for a driver candidate than someone who has been a driver since BR days.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Normally in recruitment you're looking to hire someone you think you can get along with, who will be directed by the needs of management and cohesive with their new colleagues. You're not looking for someone who already knows how to do the job you need to be done, because they probably don't exist. Worse, you need to avoid people who think they already know what the job calls for, who are set in their old ways and who will do the job in the way they think it should be done, not yours.

This hardly means experience isn't relevant. Quite the opposite to my mind. Usually, varied experience is more valuable than a narrower and deeper field.

Trouble is, the people in recruitment don't know about the jobs of the people they're employing, have never done the job themselves, and end up employing people who are good at telling them what they want to hear, but are totally unsuitable for the job

 

[Llama]

Trouble is, the people in recruitment don't know about the jobs of the people they're employing, have never done the job themselves, and end up employing people who are good at telling them what they want to hear, but are totally unsuitable for the job

This. There are far too many trainees and newer drivers now who can't hack the job, the only thing they know about it is the salary.

This certainly doesn't include everybody but the ratio of those constantly looking for an angle or to play the system is far, far more than it used to be.

 

[Grumpy Git]

This certainly doesn't include everybody but the ratio of those constantly looking for an angle or to play the system is far, far more than it used to be.

No wonder we end-up with the government we deserve. When did the majority of Brits become so selfish?

 

[ShedMistress]

This. There are far too many trainees and newer drivers now who can't hack the job, the only thing they know about it is the salary.

This certainly doesn't include everybody but the ratio of those constantly looking for an angle or to play the system is far, far more than it used to be.

Having an online forum which coaches people through the psychometric tests which are meant to be taken “blind,” probably doesn’t help......

 

[Llama]

It certainly doesn't, and the psychometric tests let far too many who aren't suitable through the net in my opinion, not to mention the recruitment overall.

 

[Grumpy Git]

It certainly doesn't, and the psychometric tests let far too many who aren't suitable through the net in my opinion, not to mention the recruitment overall.

Psychometric tests are a load of ballcocks.

Its like "posh" (but free) secondary schools having non verbal reasoning entrance examinations. It just lets in the kids who's parents have paid to have them coached to pass the exam.

 

[387star]

This. There are far too many trainees and newer drivers now who can't hack the job, the only thing they know about it is the salary.

This certainly doesn't include everybody but the ratio of those constantly looking for an angle or to play the system is far, far more than it used to be.

Can't hack it on what way ?

 

[baz962]

The psychometric tests can't really be coached , and the toc's / OPC send practice material.

 

[Llama]

Can't hack it on what way ?

Either struggle to pass out - eg fail first time round, and/or struggle once they've passed out. It's a very difficult job to go through the process, get passed out then realise you can't hack the shifts/concentration/road learning/culture/pressure/whatever.

There are plenty of drivers at our place who've got through, then messed up very quickly and their career hangs by a pigeon wing after only months, that's not a good place to be in a £50k job.

True that the psychometric test practice materials are send to candidates beforehand, but that's only a limited timescale prior to the tests thenselves, and it certainly doesn't include advice on the structured interview or in general terms in the depth that's available on forums like here.

 

[Red1980]

Psychometric tests are a load of ballcocks.

Its like "posh" (but free) secondary schools having non verbal reasoning entrance examinations. It just lets in the kids who's parents have paid to have them coached to pass the exam.

I said something like this on another thread the other day and it was amazing how quickly it was before someone went down the route of blaming the instructors for people not passing out. This is even after said people have had multiple instructors to see where their issues are.

The psychometric tests certainly aren't what they used to be. The problem I see is not just the psychometric testing though.....there's so much focus on facts and figures surrounding employment/recruitment that the old adage of employing the right person for the job seems to have disappeared......it's more about following equality guidelines these days than it is getting a job on merit. With hands tied by policies like that it's no wonder the people not suited to the roles get through.

Applicants are just as bad though.....they see the salary and actually don't consider whether the job is for them and the sacrifices involved in getting said salary. I'm not saying everyone applying should be already die hard railway but a bit of research into the industry and job roles wouldn't go amiss.

 

[ST]

it's more about following equality guidelines these days than it is getting a job on merit. With hands tied by policies like that it's no wonder the people not suited to the roles get through.

Prior to making such a comment, have you been able to draw on statistics nationally that point to this or is this simply your opinion? How does the independent nature of the Psychometric testing fit into this?

 

[387star]

Boredom
Repetition
Shift work
Constant vigilance and concentration
Old trains with poor cab leg room
Isolation

Not for everyone

I can see how the perceived glamarous nature of the role could quickly slip away

 

[ST]

If you are a driver, do you enjoy it even taking into account the above?

 

[Stigy]

Prior to making such a comment, have you been able to draw on statistics nationally that point to this or is this simply your opinion? How does the independent nature of the Psychometric testing fit into this?

I raised this concern some months ago on this forum which attracted some debate...

It’s not just opinion, it’s fact that companies actively prioritise under represented groups, you only have to look at their social media platforms such as LinkedIn. It’s not just railway, it’s most companies and agencies. Unfortunately because of this approach, it’s bound to mean that certain people are recruited not on merit, but because they tick certain equality criteria boxes. I’d certainly like to think that beyond initial recruitment processes, candidates are progressed on merit alone, but who knows.

It’s not necessarily a bad approach, however a person not capable of carrying out the job description of any role should never be recruited based on which boxes they tick. If not enough women are train drivers, by all means publicise it and to an extent prioritise recruitment (if they must), but the prioritising should stop after the paper sift stage and it should solely be on merit beyond this.

I’m not a fan of any of this prioritisation to be honest, as I’ve made clear before. If a Police Force in London decides that not enough white males were applying and put out a social media campaign inviting white males to apply and nobody else until this criteria had been met, they’d be racist (probably better to place that scenario in another country). I’ll leave it at that.

 

[scotraildriver]

TPE poached almost all their drivers for their new depot from Scotrail. Left us right in the poo and one reason there are still traincrew shortages. And for only a very small salary increase and poorer conditions.

 

[Grumpy Git]

To employ the right person(s), you need very experienced interviewers who

TPE poached almost all their drivers for their new depot from Scotrail. Left us right in the poo and one reason there are still traincrew shortages. And for only a very small salary increase and poorer conditions.

I know of someone who changed jobs for a worse basic wage and conditions because they promised him "lots of overtime".

Nowt as queer as folk.

I often wonder if the penny dropped when he got his holiday pay, but given his decision I doubt it.

 

[387star]

If you are a driver, do you enjoy it even taking into account the above?

Mostly yeah

Hate earlies though. Stinging watery eyes and irritability

I love the isolation

 

[43066]

TPE poached almost all their drivers for their new depot from Scotrail. Left us right in the poo and one reason there are still traincrew shortages. And for only a very small salary increase and poorer conditions.

Good for them - I’m sure they had their reasons.

One of the worst things about this industry is that lots of drivers sit in messrooms and moan (often justifiably) but don’t have the gumption to move TOCs.

If more people voted with their feet then the TOCs would have an incentive to improve things.

 

[Llama]

Re. experienced interviewers, that's another issue at Northern. There are some driver managers with very little experience who shouldn't be let anywhere near an interview. A few years ago we had one driver who went to be a driver manager at another depot the next working day after his two year PQA period finished. I'm no dinosaur but I've had more time on annual leave than that chap had experience in the job. Speaking to him shortly after he made the move he expressed regret, found it hard to get the respect of the drivers he managed and his management career was over very soon. He's now a driver for another TOC. While he was a manager though he interviewed a fair few prospective trainee drivers, it's fair to say that some of those he put through to the next stage were truly shocking, they were a reflection of the fact he had little experience or idea of what the job truly entailed.

 

[ST]

Thanks for the responses. Glad you are enjoying the job!

 

[Aictos]

Trouble is, the people in recruitment don't know about the jobs of the people they're employing, have never done the job themselves, and end up employing people who are good at telling them what they want to hear, but are totally unsuitable for the job

Indeed, I know of one person who has applied for various roles across a number of TOCs but gets rejected at the interview stage, me thinks it's because they are overqualified and the TOCs want people who just tick the boxes but are unsuitable for the role.

So yes @Surreytraveller I quite agree with the point you make!

 

[Red1980]

Prior to making such a comment, have you been able to draw on statistics nationally that point to this or is this simply your opinion? How does the independent nature of the Psychometric testing fit into this?

Statistics, eyesight, job advertisements, word of mouth, family in a HR environment, the obvious, nearly 15 years in the industry, and quite simply being the middle aged male that most see as the title that suffers most........luckily I've been able to draw on quite a lot over the years.

What you see as independent and what actually is independent are 2 very different things. Remember we're in an era where it's a serious faux pax to even consider asking what your assessment scores are......not to mention these days that a lot of people have very different experiences on even making it to testing....and that's no matter how excellent their application forms are.

 

[Red1980]

I raised this concern some months ago on this forum which attracted some debate...

It’s not just opinion, it’s fact that companies actively prioritise under represented groups, you only have to look at their social media platforms such as LinkedIn. It’s not just railway, it’s most companies and agencies. Unfortunately because of this approach, it’s bound to mean that certain people are recruited not on merit, but because they tick certain equality criteria boxes. I’d certainly like to think that beyond initial recruitment processes, candidates are progressed on merit alone, but who knows.

It’s not necessarily a bad approach, however a person not capable of carrying out the job description of any role should never be recruited based on which boxes they tick. If not enough women are train drivers, by all means publicise it and to an extent prioritise recruitment (if they must), but the prioritising should stop after the paper sift stage and it should solely be on merit beyond this.

I’m not a fan of any of this prioritisation to be honest, as I’ve made clear before. If a Police Force in London decides that not enough white males were applying and put out a social media campaign inviting white males to apply and nobody else until this criteria had been met, they’d be racist (probably better to place that scenario in another country). I’ll leave it at that.

Spot on.

 

[Economist]

I raised this concern some months ago on this forum which attracted some debate...

It’s not just opinion, it’s fact that companies actively prioritise under represented groups, you only have to look at their social media platforms such as LinkedIn. It’s not just railway, it’s most companies and agencies. Unfortunately because of this approach, it’s bound to mean that certain people are recruited not on merit, but because they tick certain equality criteria boxes. I’d certainly like to think that beyond initial recruitment processes, candidates are progressed on merit alone, but who knows.

It’s not necessarily a bad approach, however a person not capable of carrying out the job description of any role should never be recruited based on which boxes they tick. If not enough women are train drivers, by all means publicise it and to an extent prioritise recruitment (if they must), but the prioritising should stop after the paper sift stage and it should solely be on merit beyond this.

I’m not a fan of any of this prioritisation to be honest, as I’ve made clear before. If a Police Force in London decides that not enough white males were applying and put out a social media campaign inviting white males to apply and nobody else until this criteria had been met, they’d be racist (probably better to place that scenario in another country). I’ll leave it at that.

I have known a couple of people rushed through the recruitment process who certainly ticked the boxes. One quit during manual handling, another failed their ICA, it turns out that a traction walkaround is a bit tricky when you can't read the answers from your hand.

I've heard of another who got over 30 majors on an ICA, he failed his second attempt(!) after saying that the buffer stops, amongst other things, were a green signal.

Good for them - I’m sure they had their reasons.

One of the worst things about this industry is that lots of drivers sit in messrooms and moan (often justifiably) but don’t have the gumption to move TOCs.

If more people voted with their feet then the TOCs would have an incentive to improve things.

I do know of one or two depots where there 30-50% of drivers have left within 12 months, there's also one or two that seem to be, in effect, a training school for the TOC next door. Whilst I do believe that loyalty is justified after training, especially since I don't want to see training bonds put in place like in the airlines, drivers who've stayed for a good while should be open to a move if it benefits them.

 

[380101]

TPE poached almost all their drivers for their new depot from Scotrail. Left us right in the poo and one reason there are still traincrew shortages. And for only a very small salary increase and poorer conditions.

The lad from my depot that went to them said he'd have went for the same salary as us in ScotRail and I think alot of the others would be the same. It is the heavy workload within ScotRail (Strathclyde depot) that made him move to TPE. He says it's night and day and that they're nothing like the First lot we had!

 

[Tractor2018]

TPE poached almost all their drivers for their new depot from Scotrail. Left us right in the poo and one reason there are still traincrew shortages. And for only a very small salary increase and poorer conditions.

More than 20% on reference salary is "a very small increase"? Wow. And RDW about 60% more.

Got no idea what you mean about poorer conditions either.

Railway fact checker required I think.