Paddington derailment 16/06/16

[HMS Ark Royal]

Interesting read. The mention of Ramadan intrigues me. I know in the stated facts it is reported that fasting cannot be confirmed as a contributory factor. However I do find the possible effects interesting. I fully respect all religions etc But I do work with a young guy who fasted recently and it was a really hot period. He said it was a real struggle and put an application in to change all his shifts to earlies to avoid any fatigue etc

Well sunrise was at 0443 on 16 June and this incident occurred at 1812, so the if the fast was strictly observed, the driver had nothing to eat or drink for over 13 hours. That's bound to effect concentration levels.

My partner is from a Muslim family, though she herself is not practicing, and I once asked her father about the fasting and if there were exceptions. Apart from the usual medical reasons, small children and pregnant ladies and the elderly, he told me that persons with great responsibility are permitted to break the fast - such as a Doctor or Nurse, airline pilot, bus or coach driver and train driver. As i understand it from him, water is certainly permitted during the fasting period just nothing else.

Of course, some people choose to interpret the rules in different ways

 

[Cherry_Picker]

As a non-driver I was wondering whether or not qualified drivers on low speed moves look beyond the signal to the actual setting of the switch blades. I'm sure I would.

The thing is there have been many incidents where signals have been passed at danger when drivers have seen the points move and reacted to them rather than waiting for the signal to clear. It's better to focus on signals.

 

[Phil.]

Well sunrise was at 0443 on 16 June and this incident occurred at 1812, so the if the fast was strictly observed, the driver had nothing to eat or drink for over 13 hours. That's bound to effect concentration levels.

Quite why he didn't think the GPS applied to his train I don't know as in the picture 6004 clearly shows a arrow. As a PQ driver, with limited use of the siding it probably would have been an idea to consult his maps, I still use maps after 10 years for irregular moves.

However, I'm not impressed with the response of the TVSC managers who say that it's not possible to strictly adhere to instructions because they're too busy at Paddington. Clearly the instructions were there for a reason and should be adhered to, if that means an increase in signallers is needed then hire them, don't pick and choose which instructions you think should be applied. The operational railway is a safety critical environment and rules and regulations are there for a good reason.

Finally, after Ladbroke grove, Thames trains's (fgw/gwr predecessor) whole route learning methodology was called into question regarding Paddington and it was supposedly overhauled. I hope this incident isn't a sign that those reforms are slipping.

If a management insisted on a Driver working without the ability to have a meal/refreshment break all hell would break loose. There's a huge elephant in the room and it's being treated as a minor item. Religion cannot be allowed to affect a safety critical role.

 

[theageofthetra]

A few years back I spoke to a pilot who flew for a national carrier of a muslim country and was naturally muslim themselves and he confirmed what the other poster said that strict observance of fasting is not required in certain safety critical jobs such as his.

Will be interested to see if the likes of the Mail & Express pick up on this part of the report- they will have a field day.

By far the more disturbing part is the frankly ludicrous statement from the signalling centre that they are too busy to follow what appears to be a local operating rule re the clearing of shunt signals.

All in all a very depressing read of a preliminary report into what could well have been a far worse accident.

At least the GSMR emergency call process appeared to have worked.

 

[Tooktook]

I definitely agree with all the posts above concerning fasting. If an exception can be made in certain cases then it would certainly help. Especially with train driving where the levels of responsibility are incredibly high and concentration is required at all times.

I do believe that the workplace should cater for people's religions but as was also alluded to, safety should be the key consideration above all.

I know at my depot there is a strict Muslim who will only wet his lips with water during fasting hours. Whilst i respect this commitment i do think it raises an interesting debate. In the situations where people are strictly adhering to a fast in hot summer conditions then the chances of fatigue must be higher.

 

[scott118]

I guess, when you're job is potentially on the line, no pun intended, some, will search for every possible reason, for that employment, to be continued.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

If a driver were to be fasting and some incident happen which resulted in a fatality, who would get charged with man slaughter - the driver, the TOC or both?

 

[carriageline]

Well sunrise was at 0443 on 16 June and this incident occurred at 1812, so the if the fast was strictly observed, the driver had nothing to eat or drink for over 13 hours. That's bound to effect concentration levels.



Quite why he didn't think the GPS applied to his train I don't know as in the picture 6004 clearly shows a arrow. As a PQ driver, with limited use of the siding it probably would have been an idea to consult his maps, I still use maps after 10 years for irregular moves.



However, I'm not impressed with the response of the TVSC managers who say that it's not possible to strictly adhere to instructions because they're too busy at Paddington. Clearly the instructions were there for a reason and should be adhered to, if that means an increase in signallers is needed then hire them, don't pick and choose which instructions you think should be applied. The operational railway is a safety critical environment and rules and regulations are there for a good reason.



Finally, after Ladbroke grove, Thames trains's (fgw/gwr predecessor) whole route learning methodology was called into question regarding Paddington and it was supposedly overhauled. I hope this incident isn't a sign that those reforms are slipping.

From a signalling background, I think it's worded badly from the RAIB. I took it as the first instruction (all GPS signals must be showing proceed) isn't always viable, as Paddington is always busy, so the second instruction is in place regarding speaking to the driver and telling him the complete route is not set.

And to me the RAIB sound happy that the signaller adhered to that rule

I may of misread it, as I'm surprised any manager would openly admit flouting of a box instruction


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Blindtraveler]

The qualitty journos at the Evening standard appear to have got hold of the fasting theory. Sorry no link to share as just noticed it on Facebook

 

[ExRes]

I fail to see why some posters are having a dig at the media, if this man, or any other driver, are driving while dehydrated or not able to concentrate fully then the media have every right to highlight the situation, the question as to why TOCs/FOCs are allowing drivers to operate in this manner should also be asked

This should not be a question of religion/race etc, it should be based solely on safety

 

[Kristofferson]

If there is a trend of safety critical incidents increasing in number during fasting periods, I feel this is something the rail industry should address.

If this is just an isolated incident and 99% of fasting drivers perform just fine, then in my unqualified opinion, I'd say the blame here lies mostly with the other contributory factors.

Is that a reasonable conclusion?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

If there is a trend of safety critical incidents increasing in number during fasting periods, I feel this is something the rail industry should address.

If this is just an isolated incident and 99% of fasting drivers perform just fine, then in my unqualified opinion, I'd say the blame here lies mostly with the other contributory factors.

Is that a reasonable conclusion?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, not at all...

My first thought was that TOCs could put those drivers needing to fast during the day down as Spare, but then that might be grounds for discrimination... Unless the driver is very new to the job, I am surprised to note he had not driven that bit of track very often.

 

[Bayum]

Fasting may not be essential in safety critical roles or in those suffering from medical conditions...

It doesn't stop people feeling they have a sense of duty and a belief to fast anyway. Some Muslims see it as an absolute necessity and will refrain from taking important medications as their belief and respect for the religion is so strong.

 

[Spartacus]

We all know that not eating (and in this case drinking) affects concentration, but while it's a religious matter, even one that amounts to personal interpretation, not company would be able to 'force' someone to abstain from fasting, probably the best they could do was put them on 'special duties', ie something non-safety critical, for the duration.

 

[QueensCurve]

If a management insisted on a Driver working without the ability to have a meal/refreshment break all hell would break loose. There's a huge elephant in the room and it's being treated as a minor item. Religion cannot be allowed to affect a safety critical role.

To pick up on a possible elephant in the station, there is a difference between the right to thought conscience and religion, which is absolute, and the right to manifest religious belief. It is permissible to limit someone's right to manifest religious belief in their observance were necessary for public safety or to protect the rights of others.

 

[Phil.]

If there is a trend of safety critical incidents increasing in number during fasting periods, I feel this is something the rail industry should address.

If this is just an isolated incident and 99% of fasting drivers perform just fine, then in my unqualified opinion, I'd say the blame here lies mostly with the other contributory factors.

Is that a reasonable conclusion?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Like I posted, it's the elephant in the room. "Safety Critical" is over-used when defending Guards but is very critical for Drivers.

 

[theironroad]

Standard:

http://http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/train-derailment-at-paddington-may-have-been-result-of-driver-fasting-for-ramadan-a3324216.html

.

Rail safety chiefs have investigated whether a train derailment at Paddington station was caused because the driver had been fasting for Ramadan.

The low-speed derailment, which took place on Thursday June 16 after the driver passed a signal on red, blocked the lines resulting in huge delays for commuters at the height of the home-bound rush-hour.

As the train came off the tracks, it hit a huge mast carrying overhead cables bringing them down and closing Paddington for the rest of the evening.

 

[Uzair]

Here we go...

 

[ExRes]

Here we go...

Where are we going?

Every single reason that could have contributed to the derailment needs to be investigated, do you deny that fasting could have had a role in the incident?

 

[bramling]

No, not at all...

My first thought was that TOCs could put those drivers needing to fast during the day down as Spare, but then that might be grounds for discrimination... Unless the driver is very new to the job, I am surprised to note he had not driven that bit of track very often.

Apart from the fact that having someone down for spare turns day after day would not go down well with colleagues, it doesn't actually solve the issue as they could be called to work any or all of the time. So if it's desired that they're off the trains, they have to be released from duty.

The only real way round it is for the person concerned to make arrangements to swap their annual leave so they are off for the period in question, but this also introduces issues. What if it can't be achieved? Does it mean they will go for long periods without leave during the remainder of the year? What it lots of individuals want the same period off?

At the end of the day individuals know what the deal is when they accept the job. If there's a conflict with religion then perhaps the job isn't for them. It's not acceptable to compromise safety IMO.

Where I am there was a similar issue with someone who wanted Sundays off to attend church. It was made quite clear that she was more than welcome to do this by means of swapping with colleagues. Unfortunately, surprisingly enough everyone else also liked having Sundays off to spend time with family etc. So we started seeing "childcare" requests going in plus a tendency for the individual to go sick on a Sunday, meaning others had to do her work for her. She became highly unpopular, and eventually thankfully she messed-up on something and a way was found to get rid of her. Of course, no one forced her to take on a job which included Sunday working. This was very clearly part of the role when she signed up.

 

[BestWestern]

Like I posted, it's the elephant in the room. "Safety Critical" is over-used when defending Guards but is very critical for Drivers.

Without meaning to venture off topic, what on earth are you talking about? Tell the bloke who was banged up on Merseyside that he wasn't safety critical :roll:

Anyhow, back in the real world... All operational railway staff are fully aware of the requirements of 'fitnesss for duty'. It is drummed in regularly. If somebody attended work in the afternoon and mentioned that they hadn't eaten anything all day, I would imagine that most managers would consider their fitness for duty to be in jepardy. It is on page one of an incident report form; 'When did you last have something to eat/drink'. I will stop short of offering my personal views on whether turning up work in that condition, for any reason, is ever acceptable, but the outcome of the investigations will be interesting to see.

As an aside, how does the airline industry deal with this?

 

[Uzair]

Where are we going?

Every single reason that could have contributed to the derailment needs to be investigated, do you deny that fasting could have had a role in the incident?

With all due respect, I haven't denied a single thing. As to where we're going, I was referring to the ridiculous headlines that the Daily Mail/Express etc are likely to come up with now. Being Muslim myself, I would rather see a blame on the individual as opposed to the religion itself.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Without meaning to venture off topic, what on earth are you talking about? Tell the bloke who was banged up on Merseyside that he wasn't safety critical :roll:

Anyhow, back in the real world... All operational railway staff are fully aware of the requirements of 'fitnesss for duty'. It is drummed in regularly. If somebody attended work in the afternoon and mentioned that they hadn't eaten anything all day, I would imagine that most managers would consider their fitness for duty to be in jepardy. It is on page one of an incident report form; 'When did you last have something to eat/drink'. I will stop short of offering my personal views on whether turning up work in that condition, for any reason, is ever acceptable, but the outcome of the investigations will be interesting to see.

As an aside, how does the airline industry deal with this?

Most Muslim pilots will have something to eat and drink as, like I said before, they have a very "dangerous" job to do... I do know that some airlines roster pilots to fly with a non muslim pilot should he or she choose not to eat.

I was just wondering about the heat that was in the cab - given this man was fasting with no drink to cool down with, will they check to see if the AC was running?

 

[Bromley boy]

With all due respect, I haven't denied a single thing. As to where we're going, I was referring to the ridiculous headlines that the Daily Mail/Express etc are likely to come up with now. Being Muslim myself, I would rather see a blame on the individual as opposed to the religion itself.

I agree that it is down to the individual.

But just as people are (rightly) free to practice their religion, they are also free to decide whether or not a particular job is compatible with their particular interpretation and observance of that religion.

I would suggest strict fasting is not compatible with a safety critical role on the railway and that employees wishing to do it must either compromise the fasting while they are on duty, or choose a different job altogether.

 

[theironroad]

With all due respect, I haven't denied a single thing. As to where we're going, I was referring to the ridiculous headlines that the Daily Mail/Express etc are likely to come up with now. Being Muslim myself, I would rather see a blame on the individual as opposed to the religion itself.

I'm not sure if you're a driver or not. If you are, do you strictly observe the fast and, if so, how do you deal with maintaining concentration? Thanks.

 

[najaB]

This should not be a question of religion/race etc, it should be based solely on safety.

So should the TOC *force* the driver to break his fast?

 

[Bromley boy]

So should the TOC *force* the driver to break his fast?

The TOC will have made the requirements of the job abundantly clear to the driver in question throughout the recruitment process and subsequently during employment.

These include the requirement to be well rested, well nourished and hydrated when booking on for duty.

It is a job which imposes many restrictions on your lifestyle outside of work. If these are not acceptable, there's no gun to your head making you take the job in the first place.

 

[Domh245]

So should the TOC *force* the driver to break his fast?

Or perhaps the TOC should temporarily remove the driver from duty if he is not fit to drive.

 

[QueensCurve]

So should the TOC *force* the driver to break his fast?

The questions would be#:-

• Does the fast affect the drivers' fitness to work?
• If so, what is the most reasonable way of ensuring safety?

I don't think the first question has been adequately answered yet.



The second question would mean the least interference with the driver's ability to manifest religious belief and earn his living while ensuring the safety of the railway.

 

[najaB]

These include the requirement to be well rested, well nourished and hydrated when booking on for duty.

Honest question: does the job description/standard explicitly say that you have to be well nourished and hydrated?