Late train further delayed by rest break

[talltim]

Really-
So he has questioned whether staff need breaks, well actually he has incorrectly stated that we dont, which we do! :roll:

He didn't state that, he said 'the answer appeared to be 'no''. I'd agree that the answer is 'yes'
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I can understand the reluctance to inform passengers that the train is late due to required PNBs. However there are careful ways of wording it, and even just saying that what time it is due to leave, with no explanation of why it better than giving a completely wrong time, and then just saying delayed.
If the guard needed a PNB, the Hull Trains control should have known and let the signallers/station know. Hull Trains control don't have that many services to look after.

 

[TUC]

The point I was trying to make in the OP was that I was keen for the discussion to not get diverted into whether the break was a legal requirement. The question of whether it is or isn't was simply a side comment. The core issue was that, if rest breaks were a regular issue during substantial delays on long distance services, one would expect to see trains from smaller TOCs (where there are fewer staff to give flexibility) regularly having protracted turnarounds at stations, whereas I have rarely seen this happen. The fact that this was the only train with an unannounced protracted delay suggests that something unexpected was happening.

In terms of keeping passengers informed, it could have been a simple announcement along the lines of 'we apologise that there has been a further delay to the 1348 service to Hull. An update will be given at 1415'. That would have given passengers reassurance that they could go and buy a coffee whilst waiting without fear of missing the train. It's just basic customer service and communication.

 

[Llanigraham]

Think the difference is that you get no rostered pnbs. Breaks are to be taken as convenient.

And they often aren't!!
On my 12 hour days I have to fit toilet and food breaks between trains, which is why most meals are eaten standing up between lever pulls!
How the hell busier boxes cope I don't know??

 

[BestWestern]

The issue here is that some crews will take their booked break as their are entitled to do, but others will merrily go without anything at all if the circumstances are such that it reduces delays (often if it is their 'going home' train, i.e. last train of the shift). Control/resources staff are not shy of asking people to move, reduce or give up their breaks, sometimes in return for an overtime payment, which I personally find rather disagreeable. The variations in individuals' attitudes can mean that sometimes a train will be delayed, and sometimes it won't be. Station staff might assume that because a certain service turned around in five minutes last time it was delayed, the same will happen again this time, but the crew this time may wish to take their break or indeed it may even be a different crew on a different diagram. Equally, some crew memebers are a tad more proactive in communicating than others, and some may not reveal that they will be leaving late until they arrive, whereas their more helpful colleagues will have already phoned control. None of that changes the basic fact that train crews need a break (guards as well as drivers, our cock-ups can kill people too), but abuse and/or ignorance of that is not rare. The obvious comparison with professional road vehicle drivers is often given, the difference being that their restrictions are legally enforceable whereas those on the railway aren't - a significant failing in my opinion.

As for the public information, yes it is of course deeply irritating when a stated departure time is suddenly scuppered for no apparent reason. However, bear in mind that the railway tends to work on the 'root cause' where delays are concerned - so if the crew are late arriving because of a level crossing failure or whatever, that will be the given cause of any resulting delays for the rest of the day. Hence the slightly bizarre explanation 'congestion caused by an earlier delay...' - when something has caused widespread problems that reason will be the stated cause of residual disruption during service recovery. Stating a miriad of other individual reasons for lots of different services gives the impression that there are hundreds of isolated delays, when in fact the whole show is actually up the swanny because of one particular incident.

 

[455driver]

Just to clarify, when a member of staff takes their break on the train, that means they are a passenger, and another member of staff of the same grade is on the train performing their duties (or in the case of Catering, the buffet is closed).

I said that in the previous post to yours!

 

[bb21]

In terms of keeping passengers informed, it could have been a simple announcement along the lines of 'we apologise that there has been a further delay to the 1348 service to Hull. An update will be given at 1415'. That would have given passengers reassurance that they could go and buy a coffee whilst waiting without fear of missing the train. It's just basic customer service and communication.

They could, if they have such information.

 

[TUC]

They could, if they have such information.

All it needs is for a message to be passed to them that 'the train crew have taken a rest break of xx minutes. Therefore, the earliest we will be able to update on the departure time is xxxx hrs. Please announce that an update will be given at that time'. Not difficult.

 

[PHILIPE]

Just to clarify, when a member of staff takes their break on the train, that means they are a passenger, and another member of staff of the same grade is on the train performing their duties (or in the case of Catering, the buffet is closed).

Yes, a passenger. Everybody else is a customer according to this obsessional change of terminology by TOCs.

 

[Greenback]

All it needs is for a message to be passed to them that 'the train crew have taken a rest break of xx minutes. Therefore, the earliest we will be able to update on the departure time is xxxx hrs. Please announce that an update will be given at that time'. Not difficult.

You'd think so, wouldn't you, but communication doesn't seem to be one of the railway's strengths!

 

[plastictaffy]

Trains are regularly delayed for a member of traincrew having a PNB. I did it Tuesday. Happens more than people realise. What I like to do, if I've had a late-running PNB, is stroll out to the train afterwards, with a mug of tea in my hand. You get very disapproving looks from the passengers, makes me smile every time.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The issue here is that some crews will take their booked break as their are entitled to do, but others will merrily go without anything at all if the circumstances are such that it reduces delays (often if it is their 'going home' train, i.e. last train of the shift). Control/resources staff are not shy of asking people to move, reduce or give up their breaks, sometimes in return for an overtime payment, which I personally find rather disagreeable.

Regularly we get offered "The Dozen" to give up or cut short a PNB. Annoys the hell out of me.

 

[455driver]

Regularly we get offered "The Dozen" to give up or cut short a PNB. Annoys the hell out of me.

Lucky you, the last time I went (well) over me day I was given 5 minutes extra, worked 11 hours 15 and was paid 11 hours 20 and saved the company the costs of a sh#tload of taxis!
They have asked me a few times since and each time they ask I simply ask them why they are wasting a phone call!

In my 37 year working life I have never felt so under-valued and taken for granted as an employee as I do here!

 

[plastictaffy]

Lucky you, the last time I went (well) over me day I was given 5 minutes extra, worked 11 hours 15 and was paid 11 hours 20 and saved the company the costs of a sh#tload of taxis!
They have asked me a few times since and each time they ask I simply ask them why they are wasting a phone call!

In my 37 year working life I have never felt so under-valued and taken for granted as an employee as I do here!

5 minutes?? I wouldn't be doing it again, either. What I find at our place is that, if your face fits, you may well get a dozen and paid off the following day, if it's likely you won't get your 12 hours off. If it doesn't, you just get moaned at for having your booked PNB, with pay (almost to the minute) extra, and end up being "time available" the following day, and come in and work the rest of your job when you are legal.

If it's that bad, could you not take you and your driver's key with you??

 

[TUC]

The issue here is that some crews will take their booked break as their are entitled to do, but others will merrily go without anything at all if the circumstances are such that it reduces delays (often if it is their 'going home' train, i.e. last train of the shift). Control/resources staff are not shy of asking people to move, reduce or give up their breaks, sometimes in return for an overtime payment, which I personally find rather disagreeable.

Nothing wrong with being offered payment in return for your time surely. Better than being asked to do it for free.

 

[455driver]

If it's that bad, could you not take you and your driver's key with you??

Not a great deal of choice down here!

The place isnt bad to work at though, the routes are okay, other staff brilliant, (direct) management are pretty good as well (yes seriously), It certainly isnt all doom and gloom but its just centralised 'Control' which loses out the human touch, we are just a number down here and if you are a flat front driver they are not particularly interested in you.

 

[LBSCR Times]

It's even more frustrating when very senior managers complain about the length of turn-round times some drivers have, and want to cut it down, without realising the consequences.
When it was FCC, turn-round times of an hour were not uncommon, allowing for PNB's, so often you could recover the service with no delays. However, there were a few turns, where the absolute minimum time was allowed, and a 5' late arrival at Brighton meant a 5' late start back again. Of course, one consequence of this was that the train had to often run fast to avoid delaying trains behind.

 

[Parham Wood]

The point I was trying to make in the OP was that I was keen for the discussion to not get diverted into whether the break was a legal requirement. The question of whether it is or isn't was simply a side comment. The core issue was that, if rest breaks were a regular issue during substantial delays on long distance services, one would expect to see trains from smaller TOCs (where there are fewer staff to give flexibility) regularly having protracted turnarounds at stations, whereas I have rarely seen this happen. The fact that this was the only train with an unannounced protracted delay suggests that something unexpected was happening.

In terms of keeping passengers informed, it could have been a simple announcement along the lines of 'we apologise that there has been a further delay to the 1348 service to Hull. An update will be given at 1415'. That would have given passengers reassurance that they could go and buy a coffee whilst waiting without fear of missing the train. It's just basic customer service and communication.

I agree it would be good PR to advise the actual expected delay once known. However I once was in a similar situation at Brussels airport early one evening where my flight had technical problems and would not leave until 23:00 due to awaiting a part to be flown in. We taxied into the city, had a nice meal and were back by around 22:00, only to see the plane had "departed". The problem had been fixed earlier than expected. Ended up as the only 2 pax on a 2am flight to London - shortest take off run and flight I have had on that route. Never made that mistake again! So would hope any times given to pax are realistically of the no earlier than type, although I doubt many would leave the station unless a prolonged delay and the local pub beckons!

 

[drbdrb]

There seems to be a bit of a contradiction between a "legally required" break, and an employer bribing an employee to break the law.

Surely a safety conscious employee would report their employer to the appropriate safety regulator if that happened.

 

[bb21]

There seems to be a bit of a contradiction between a "legally required" break, and an employer bribing an employee to break the law.

Surely a safety conscious employee would report their employer to the appropriate safety regulator if that happened.

In theory...

In reality...

 

[drbdrb]

So the much revered safety is for sale?

How little silver does it take, or does it depend on how illegal and dangerous?

 

[bb21]

or does it depend on how illegal and dangerous?

Possibly, but reporting your own employer is always a tricky one, unless you no longer wants to work there.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Possibly, but reporting your own employer is always a tricky one, unless you no longer wants to work there.

You can do it anonymously via CIRAS. Otherwise I'd agree, it can only be described as rather detrimental to your employment.

I will enforce breaks and our lot have got 20 minute cab breaks on their turns, and I enforce those too and it does have its advantages in that you generally miss out a load of stops to get the train back into Waterloo for its next working.

But that's entirely down to the poor diagramming that they do. They've had shots at me before over breaks & going over the time limits and so on, so now I enforce them.

They can't have it both ways. Sorry an all.

 

[BestWestern]

Nothing wrong with being offered payment in return for your time surely. Better than being asked to do it for free.

It's rather clear from your curt attitude to this whole issue that you fail to appreciate the purpose and value of appropriate rest breaks for job roles where errors can have severe consequences. I don't think any more needs to be said.

 

[Delta558]

So the much revered safety is for sale?

How little silver does it take, or does it depend on how illegal and dangerous?

It's down to the individual, and (I dislike saying it) how safety conscious they actually are. Our Rostering department are generally very good about this now - if you can let them know in advance that you are likely to delay trains by having your break they will do their best to cover it. If they can't, it'll run late and there will be no complaints other than from passengers (who obviously can't see behind the scenes and don't understand that their safety is being prioritised).

Edited - Best Western, you hit it nicely with the 'value' of breaks. I wonder how people would feel if they had a guard who had worked through his only break in a 10 hour shift and had a major incident to deal with at the end. That half hour earlier in the day could make the difference between their grumpy guard who stays in the back cab and passes on no information and the one who (after a short refresh in the middle of their ten hour shift) is in the carriage talking to people.

 

[RPM]

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.

 

[carriageline]

This place makes me laugh. People are moaning that the TOC didn't tell them the guard was having his break. But last time this happened (I believe it was on South Eastern, and the guard was found having his break in M&S) IIRC a whole storm kicked off about it being unacceptable! And of course when the papers got hold of the story...

You can't win nor lose sometimes!

 

[drbdrb]

It's down to the individual, and (I dislike saying it) how safety conscious they actually are.

But if it is a "legally required" break, then it is not down to the individual to choose to break the law.

Surely if an individual does choose to sell the safety of the passengers by accepting a payment to ignore a legally required break, then both they and their employers would be liable for prosecution, even if no incident occurred as a result of them breaking the law.

 

[ComUtoR]

Nothing wrong with being offered payment in return for your time surely. Better than being expected to do it for free.

Sorry, I corrected your post.

 

[talltim]

From this thread I now understand why the OP said

discussion on whether rest breaks (in the context of drivers) are a legal requirement (for which the answer appeared to be 'no')

Are they legally required?
If not, then don't say they are *
If they are, why are companies and individuals giving them up in return for money/time in lieu ?

*There is a difference between legally required and required to keep up concentration etc.

 

[RPM]

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

 

[nuts & bolts]

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

As a conductor, If the turn is a short one I will pass on the pnb and catch up later. but will make sure I'm hydrated as I go!