Amount of Paperwork on the railway

[ole man]

Does anybody agree that the amount of paperwork on the railway is to much,and it doesn't make the job any safer,whats the difference in today than years ago?i wonder if there are more accidents/deaths on the railway now than there was years ago?

 

[The Snap]

Does anybody agree that the amount of paperwork on the railway is to much,and it doesn't make the job any safer,whats the difference in today than years ago?i wonder if there are more accidents/deaths on the railway now than there was years ago?

You could argue that there is too much paperwork I suppose.

However, I'd make an educated guess and suggest that the number of deaths on the railways now, in terms of staff, is significantly lower than it was say 50 years ago.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

We live in a world of litigation. No win no fee solicitors have made reams of paperwork more necessary than ever, sadly.

 

[strange6]

You only have to look at the cases the drivers and guards carry around with them to realise that. Unless it contains their butties and flask that is

 

[T163R]

What's...paperwork ? (sorry)

 

[O L Leigh]

A lot of it is to do with delay attribution.

I had to file a report today explaining why the rear of my 12 car ECS working was foul of the junction and caused knock-on delays in spite of this happening every time anything longer than a 4 car train enters the depot. All this was arse-covering on the part of the signaller who actually delayed me by holding me at a red signal when I was actually timed to run straight through.

However, the level of rail deaths due to accident has fallen year on year. Whether or not this has any relation to the amount of paperwork I couldn't say, but there is certainly a lot more attention focused on competence than was the case before. All training is auditted and notices require to be signed for. Sure it's a lot of paperwork, but it does provide an audit trail that shows that the railways are doing their part in ensuring safety.

O L Leigh

 

[The Informer]

A lot of it is to do with delay attribution.

I had to file a report today explaining why the rear of my 12 car ECS working was foul of the junction and caused knock-on delays in spite of this happening every time anything longer than a 4 car train enters the depot. All this was arse-covering on the part of the signaller who actually delayed me by holding me at a red signal when I was actually timed to run straight through.

However, the level of rail deaths due to accident has fallen year on year. Whether or not this has any relation to the amount of paperwork I couldn't say, but there is certainly a lot more attention focused on competence than was the case before. All training is auditted and notices require to be signed for. Sure it's a lot of paperwork, but it does provide an audit trail that shows that the railways are doing their part in ensuring safety.

O L Leigh

And then there is the old story of the trackworker asking the storeman for a wheelbarrow to carry the days paperwork!

 

[whhistle]

Yes.

However much of it is carried over from British Rail days. Plus, like O L Leigh says, it's all about rail companies blaming each other and trying to get money for delay causes from each other.

Sort of makes me think going back to calling all companies British Rail wouldn't be a bad thing.

 

[Rugd1022]

You only have to look at the cases the drivers and guards carry around with them to realise that. Unless it contains their butties and flask that is

Today I have been mostly carrying in my kit bag...

hot water flask - check,
small milk flask - check,
tea bags - check,
British Rail spoon - check,
small pot of sugar - check,
sarnie box crammed with rolls, biccies and cake,
folder containing this weeks work diagrams, roster, ASLEF diary, ATOC pass, comany IDs, passing signals at danger form, signal irregularity forms, weekly notices, periodical notices etc - check,
two issues of the GWR Journal for when I'm stopped at Bedford North Jcn for over an hour - check,
Hi-viz trousers - check,
lamp - check,
various railway keys - check
wallet - check
car keys - check,
house keys - check,
company mobile phone - check,
glasses - check,

Don't think I've left anything out.... course, there are some who only carry a lamp and a cup when on duty

 

[michael769]

hot water flask - check,
small milk flask - check,
tea bags - check,
British Rail spoon - check,
small pot of sugar - check,
sarnie box crammed with rolls, biccies and cake,
:

Hmmm, so now we know. next time you get peckish on a train with no trolley service - you just need to track the driver down for supplies!

 

[strange6]

Today I have been mostly carrying in my kit bag...

hot water flask - check,
small milk flask - check,
tea bags - check,
British Rail spoon - check,
small pot of sugar - check,
sarnie box crammed with rolls, biccies and cake,
folder containing this weeks work diagrams, roster, ASLEF diary, ATOC pass, comany IDs, passing signals at danger form, signal irregularity forms, weekly notices, periodical notices etc - check,
two issues of the GWR Journal for when I'm stopped at Bedford North Jcn for over an hour - check,
Hi-viz trousers - check,
lamp - check,
various railway keys - check
wallet - check
car keys - check,
house keys - check,
company mobile phone - check,
glasses - check,

Don't think I've left anything out.... course, there are some who only carry a lamp and a cup when on duty

Yeah but your freight so you don't count!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Hmmm, so now we know. next time you get peckish on a train with no trolley service - you just need to track the driver down for supplies!

Those are essential supplies for freight men, surely???

 

[33056]

Don't think I've left anything out.... course, there are some who only carry a lamp and a cup when on duty

Sounds like a couple of drivers that I know, usually seen with little more than a lamp and an executive plastic carrier bag

 

[dk1]

My bag is nowhere near so heavy now as i just buy coffee at AMT

 

[ole man]

What's...paperwork ? (sorry)

what paperwork,i go to work with 2 a4 folders bursting at the seems,rimini(which i understand)task brief,wpp,accident forms and phone numbers,exceedance of hours forms,liability forms,the list goes on and on,and does'nt make my job or anybody ive spoken to any easier,and does'nt stop accidents from happening

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

It's not so much the amount of paperwork that annoys but more the zeal in which inconsequential errors are persued with. For example, the line blockage form has a box to list Protecting Signal(s). If there is only one protecting signal, the (s) MUST be crossed out, otherwise it goes on your record and more than one instance can lead to poor performance proceedures being instigated.

Now, two things. The form does not actually say you have to cross out the (s)... indeed my understand of a (s) at the end of word means it could be either/or and no distiction needs to be made. But the auditors, most of whom would be reduced to tears if they had to work a busy Power Signal Box, insist that it must be done. Because crossing out an (s) is a good use of a signalmans precious time and concentration.... By the way it's not JUST that, there are many other points in the form where the auditors and local managers have stuck their oar in which leads to a good distraction whilst you confirm every i has been dotted and t crossed.

Secondly, is this actually making anything safer? I agree that if the blocking points are wrong, that is a serious error that must be picked up. But right now there appears no distinction between the two errors, if indeed, you class the first instance as an "error".

 

[stanley T]

Yeah but your freight so you don't count!

Use airline pilot's terms perhaps? - passengers are SLFs (self loading freight)

 

[DarloRich]

You only have to look at the cases the drivers and guards carry around with them to realise that. Unless it contains their butties and flask that is

That case is for their snap

The reams of paperwork are all about back covering, the prevention of litigation and of course, the MAIN priority, the safety of colleagues.

I, personally, think the standards should set the framework or boundary which you must not cross, but allow the "man on the ground" to plan and operate freely within that framework. It then allows for individuals and conditions to be taken into account when planning and operating a job, it should not specify every little point to follow in a regimented format.

However, the world in which we live today prevents this from happening as it simply isn’t worth the risk in allowing a litigation loophole.

 

[exile]

The number of accidental deaths on the railways, both passenger and staff, is far, far less than in previous decades. So (as with speed cameras on the roads which have also coincided with reduced death rates) it's hard to claim that the elf-and-safety culture hasn't succeeded. If any train company or the government came straight out and said they're willing to see higher fatality rates in order to cut red tape I can imagine what the reaction would be.

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

Passenger fatalities have largely reduced as a result of technological advances - better crash worthyness and TPWS etc, paperwork has had little to do with this.

There is a question about how much better training and compliance have achieved in reducing staff fatalaties versus how much paperwork as. It could become counter-productive in the long run as well. I had COSS ask me for an illogical and unsafe Line Blockage. Upon challenging him, his response was "Well, that's what my paperwork says". We don't want a new generation of COSSes unable to understand why their paperwork is wrong.

The reams of paperwork expanded as much as a result of privatisation and the need to create an audit trail as it was 'elf and safetee'.

You know the H&S brigade are struggling to justify their jobs when they insist on different coloured hard hats...

 

[BestWestern]

I agree that the level of paperwork can be excessive; WON's in particular spring to mind, with the same notices not only repeated every week for months on end, but often also repeated several times within the same issue. I have always assumed that this is pure laziness on the part of those who compile it. I get irritated at the needless use of tons of paper each week, much of which goes directly into the bin.

As for delays, this must be one of the most pointless and costly wastes - both in terms of time and resources - that exists on the railways today, and is a clear demonstration of the reasons why privatisation has failed. Last week my Driver passed comment on our train being needlessly checked down on approach to a station, with the starting signal being at Danger as we stopped in the platform. Driver approached the SPT just as the aspect cleared to green. His view was very firmly that this had been done deliberately in order to ensure that we 'held on' to our delay of a minute of so, which he had been trying his best to recoup, in order that the TOC could then be fined for this delay. Obviously I can't verify the truth in that, but it certainly sounds about right; regular daily scheduled service, nothing in front, small delay incurred earlier on in the journey due to a Passcom activation. What a needless merry-go-round, and they think getting rid of staff will solve all the problems!!

 

[exile]

In my own "industry" (education) there's a similar trend towards box-ticking and huge amounts of data to collate to demonstrate that you're doing the job (which of course you're not - you're too busy ticking boxes)

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

I agree that the level of paperwork can be excessive; WON's in particular spring to mind, with the same notices not only repeated every week for months on end, but often also repeated several times within the same issue. I have always assumed that this is pure laziness on the part of those who compile it. I get irritated at the needless use of tons of paper each week, much of which goes directly into the bin.

As for delays, this must be one of the most pointless and costly wastes - both in terms of time and resources - that exists on the railways today, and is a clear demonstration of the reasons why privatisation has failed. Last week my Driver passed comment on our train being needlessly checked down on approach to a station, with the starting signal being at Danger as we stopped in the platform. Driver approached the SPT just as the aspect cleared to green. His view was very firmly that this had been done deliberately in order to ensure that we 'held on' to our delay of a minute of so, which he had been trying his best to recoup, in order that the TOC could then be fined for this delay. Obviously I can't verify the truth in that, but it certainly sounds about right; regular daily scheduled service, nothing in front, small delay incurred earlier on in the journey due to a Passcom activation. What a needless merry-go-round, and they think getting rid of staff will solve all the problems!!

That's improbable for three reasons - number one is generally only delays of 3 minutes are investigated (occasionally 2 mins are recorded) unless it is a speed restriction which has an auto-generated trust delay of a minute or more. Secondly, Network Rail do not benefit from a TOCs self inflicted delay - money only changes hands when either a TOC delays another TOC, or NR delays a TOC (or FOC). Thirdy, signallers don't care about trust attribution unless it's a delay they have caused! This even extends to regulating decisons not being affected by who caused them, the best decision (well, in theory!!) will be taken regardless of whether NR or the TOC is the route cause, because signallers are not given any kind of targets or incetives to reduce NR delays. Only a signallers own delays are in any way monitored.

 

[9K43]

After many years wandering the many tracks of railways, I carried in my bag/pockets drivers slips, diary with commonly used train loading written in them, always my Bardic Hand Lamp, back to back radios, heavy duty gloves, hi viz jacket(put on in the shed taken off at the end of my safety critical shift.).
Snap for a 12 hour shift on a ballast train in some god forsaken tunnel, with all the man hole covers taken off so you fall down the drain and get 10 stitches at the local Casualty.
Union claim for for EWS not providing me with a safe working environment.
A nice dented flask, which would do 2 cups of tea, Co op Red Label Tea bags, bag of sugar and a spoon.
In my early days on the railway, my bag weighed a ton, so the only things in my bag was what I needed to get through the night.
Always remember whats in your bag, you have to carry.
Most important thing is your lamp and snap and you always need to know where your car keys are to escape home after a 12 hour stint chewing smelly diesel fumes and cig smoke from a chain smoking driver.
Safety must be the first prioity of those who work on the railway.

 

[BestWestern]

That's improbable for three reasons - number one is generally only delays of 3 minutes are investigated (occasionally 2 mins are recorded) unless it is a speed restriction which has an auto-generated trust delay of a minute or more. Secondly, Network Rail do not benefit from a TOCs self inflicted delay - money only changes hands when either a TOC delays another TOC, or NR delays a TOC (or FOC). Thirdy, signallers don't care about trust attribution unless it's a delay they have caused! This even extends to regulating decisons not being affected by who caused them, the best decision (well, in theory!!) will be taken regardless of whether NR or the TOC is the route cause, because signallers are not given any kind of targets or incetives to reduce NR delays. Only a signallers own delays are in any way monitored.

That does confirm some of what I thought, particularly the issue of TOC delays not benefitting NR. The delay was possibly enough to register 2 minutes, but it would have been marginal. Thank you for some construcive input! It must be a considerable additional stress to signalling staff to have to constantly bear in mind that any delay will come back to you, do most Bobby's regard it as a hinderance or simply accept the situation?!

 

[Get-Pulled-Off]

Unless a train is early and delays a train that is (or was) on time, then regulating decisions are always attributed to the root cause and not attributed to the signaller. For example, run a late train in front of an on time train, and the delay to the previously right time train will be attributed to the reason why the late train was delayed orginally. In this case the attribution will be "Follow Late". However, if the exact same situation occured and I ran the on time train, the delay to the late train (and getting later) will be "Follow on time" and be attributed, again, to the original incident that delayed it.

Of course there are good and bad decisions with regulating, but essentially a signaller can run either train and not be have a delay attibuted to them. I have only seen two occasions where a signaller has been given a delay for running an on time train. Both occasions the regulating was spectacularly poor - an on time stopper 1 minute ahead of a late express down the branch, and the other was a late class 4 run 3 minutes ahead of a 125mph Class 1 for 50 miles when it could have been held.

Other than that the only 2 common reasons for picking up delays for signallers are an early train delaying an on time train, or being slow to clear a signal.