London Bridge : Train hit buffers 13/12/24

[35B]

You’re probably right, but I’m not a medical professional, so couldn’t speculate with any degree of accuracy.
But the standards are different, often more restrictive, blood alcohol limits for an example off the top of my head.

I’m sure in the instances both you and I alluded to, it is more to do with the administrative/clerical/process of review from the DVLA.

But this isn’t an egalitarian policy, since owning a DVLA driving licence doesn’t preclude you from driving a train. So this medical standard doesn’t apply to all drivers, given that some may not possess a DVLA licence at all, so therefore it isn’t a fair ruling.

If the railway's conditions are all at least as onerous as those applied by DVLA, then there's a logic in saying that if DVLA refuse to grant a licence, that excludes someone from driving. That's an entirely reasonable proxy measure, and still leaves room for occupational health assessments of those who don't drive a road vehicle.

The issue, on which I suspect rail operator is no better than DVLA, is where DVLA's process for assessing evidence is fundamentally flawed, and doesn't respond in a timely way.

 

[PLY2AYS]

If the railway's conditions are all at least as onerous as those applied by DVLA, then there's a logic in saying that if DVLA refuse to grant a licence, that excludes someone from driving. That's an entirely reasonable proxy measure, and still leaves room for occupational health assessments of those who don't drive a road vehicle.

The issue, on which I suspect rail operator is no better than DVLA, is where DVLA's process for assessing evidence is fundamentally flawed, and doesn't respond in a timely way.

I think that’s an entirely fair assessment, in honesty. Well surmised.

 

[michael74]

We may be violently agreeing. My point is that if anyone is working hours that create fatigue, then that’s a management failure.

As mentioned up thread, more than once I have declared myself unfit to work a train (as a Guard) due to fatigue (I also hold a Class 2 HGV licence so I know about DVLA drivers hours and the individuals responsibilities). But there certainly is a culture in the railway that one should grasp with both hands all the RDW one can get, whereas in the haulage industry once you have hit your hours, that's it.... (Officially)

While I don't disagree that there appears to be a failure of the management system that allowed this driver to work way in excess of what most people would seem reasonable, there is still a responsibility of the individual to monitor their own fatigue. I don't really believe that this driver hadn't already felt the effects of fatigue before commencing his shift, because we have all done it, was that signal off? What was the last station we called at.... Or driving home was that traffic light green?....

In the end while at work amongst a miriad rules regulations and laws we have a duty under the Health and Safety act to take reasonable care for their own safety and that of others, cooperate with employers on safety, and follow instructions/training.

I left the last section in to reiterate the equal responsibility of the employer.

 

[whoosh]

It's a tough one. If you have a microsleep and crash your car then there's a pretty good chance that the police will arrest you for careless or dangerous driving. There only has to be a suspicion for them to arrest you. It doesn't mean they will charge you or that the CPS will prosecute you. It's hard to argue that train drivers shouldn't be held to the same standard.

Turn up the radio, open the window, pull over when safe for 20 minutes or so to have a break.

That's the advice given to car drivers.

Train drivers - lucky in this case that there was a cab window that could be opened, there isn't on some traction; no music/radio allowed, sit in silence at all times; and where do you 'pull over'? There isn't anywhere. Can you imagine a train stopping and the driver saying, "I'm just having a 20 minute power nap," and holding up the whole railway? And if he doesn't truthfully describe the delay, but just says there's a delay, how long until THUD THUD THUD on the cab door and disgruntled passengers asking how long it's going to be?
Options seem very constrained and limited.

Stricter drink and drug standards though.

 

[Horizon22]

We may be violently agreeing. My point is that if anyone is working hours that create fatigue, then that’s a management failure.

Yes it is, but I don’t think it is fully one. Any safety-critical staff has fatigue drilled into them, and whilst allowing them to do so many shifts in the first place is a management / rostering failure - especially with no checks or balances - the staff member offering and accepting them must have known deep down too how they were feeling.

You can’t just wish away fatigue and sleep-related issues. They’re intrinsic to all humans but some people try and get by with endemic problems.

 

[35B]

Turn up the radio, open the window, pull over when safe for 20 minutes or so to have a break.

That's the advice given to car drivers.

Train drivers - lucky in this case that there was cab window that could be opened, there isn't on some traction; no music/radio allowed, sit in silence at all times; and where do you 'pull over'? There isn't anywhere. Can you imagine a train stopping and the driver saying, "I'm just having a 20 minute power nap," and holding up the whole railway? And if he doesn't truthfully describe the delay, but just says there's a delay, how long until THUD THUD THUD on the cab door and disgruntled passengers asking how long it's going to be?
Options seem very constrained and limited.

Stricter drink and drug standards though.

What's interesting is that the report references that advice for drivers being wrong - but the cross-reference is unavailable online

 

[Tetchytyke]

Yes it is, but I don’t think it is fully one. Any safety-critical staff has fatigue drilled into them, and whilst allowing them to do so many shifts in the first place is a management / rostering failure - especially with no checks or balances - the staff member offering and accepting them must have known deep down too how they were feeling.

The incident didn't happen on a rest day, it happened on a normal shift.

And that makes it trickier. You do the overtime because you feel fine and you think you'll continue to feel fine. But then something comes up- in this case, on the day of the incident the driver had to wake up earlier than normal because of childcare issues- and suddenly you feel fatigued.

Taking the money for overtime then calling in sick for your normal shift looks bad and everyone knows it looks bad, no matter how supportive or understanding an employer is. So human nature is to try and muddle through, it's only one day, it'll be grand, and then we end up where we are.

What's interesting is that the report references that advice for drivers being wrong - but the cross-reference is unavailable online

It's not wrong so much as the boost in alertness you get is very short-lived.

Options seem very constrained and limited.

Absolutely, once you're committed as a train driver you are committed. The RAIB report references that issue, drivers all know the chaos they'll unleash if they decide they're too fatigued at an intermediate station. So again, more pressure to keep going, it'll be grand.

 

[Harpo]

whilst allowing them to do so many shifts in the first place is a management / rostering failure - especially with no checks or balances

I’d go back a step further and consider the availability of plentiful overtime a consequence of management failures too. However, there’s doubtless a degree of culpability at DfT too if funding is constrained but full service delivery is still mandated.

 

[Horizon22]

The incident didn't happen on a rest day, it happened on a normal shift.

That doesn't really matter. These things accumulate.

 

[D1015]

I'll stay away from the BTP and specific-incident speculation but fatigue management is at times somewhat close to the bone on some TOCs and in NR as well. For example in one TOC you can be finishing at 1am, 130am on Saturday night (into Sunday morning) and then you're back in at 430am the following Monday morning. You've had your twelve hours rest yes but your body is absolutely screwed at this point. Or there's the section where, so much for trying to push down to a 48hr rolling period, you can be rostered Thurs-Fri-Sat on 12hr shifts, off Sunday, then back in Mon-Tues-Weds, on 12hr shifts which means not only 60, but seventy two hours in a single 7day rolling period.

My fear is that corporate memory is being eroded after infamous accidents, through retirement, replacement and the shifting-into-managament a generation of people who just don't remember the effects of horrific accidents such as Hatfield etc. I quietly suspect a lot of decision makers have never had to work onerous shifts that operatives such as drivers, guards, dispatchers, signallers have.

 

[MotCO]

Wasn't the Tramlink accident in Croydon also the result of onerous shift patterns? Were 'lessons not learned'?

 

[Horizon22]

Wasn't the Tramlink accident in Croydon also the result of onerous shift patterns? Were 'lessons not learned'?

There are "onerous shift patterns" all across the railway industry, such is the nature of shift-work. And the cause of both has been fatigue and a suspected micro-sleep, but in the case of the Croydon Tramlink there was no suggestion that the driver had been working additional shifts as overtime and therefore that wasn't a factor.

 

[357]

There are "onerous shift patterns" all across the railway industry, such is the nature of shift-work. And the cause of both has been fatigue and a suspected micro-sleep, but in the case of the Croydon Tramlink there was no suggestion that the driver had been working additional shifts as overtime and therefore that wasn't a factor.

I think it was the GBRf Doncaster report that also mentioned driver hours and rest day working?

 

[Tetchytyke]

I quietly suspect a lot of decision makers have never had to work onerous shifts that operatives such as drivers, guards, dispatchers, signallers have.

Straight from the graduate programme into middle management, never having worked shift work, zero understanding of how demanding it is. Yep, it’s a big problem.

It’s why you get so many shift work patterns- not just in the railway industry- which are backwards rotating. It absolutely destroys your body clock.

That doesn't really matter. These things accumulate.

That wasn’t my point. My point is that it is very difficult for someone to bank the cash for overtime only to call in sick/fatigued for their normal shift. Of course with hindsight they shouldn’t have done so much overtime but by then it’s too late.

There are "onerous shift patterns" all across the railway industry, such is the nature of shift-work. And the cause of both has been fatigue and a suspected micro-sleep, but in the case of the Croydon Tramlink there was no suggestion that the driver had been working additional shifts as overtime and therefore that wasn't a factor.

No, but the shift patterns themselves were identified as a big problem. The backwards rotation in particular.

A big issue with fatigue is the lack of a consistent shift pattern. It destroys your body clock. I could always deal with working nights but the ‘continental shifts’ of four nights then four days, with minimal time between the two shift patterns, absolutely killed me. Finishing late Saturday then being in early Monday made it almost impossible to get sufficient good quality sleep. You had to wake before you were ready on the Sunday morning and you had to go to bed before you were ready on the Sunday evening.

It’s a disastrous shift pattern but so many places seem to use it. Usually brought in by managers who learned about it on their management degree but never actually have to work it.

 

[Horizon22]

Straight from the graduate programme into middle management, never having worked shift work, zero understanding of how demanding it is. Yep, it’s a big problem.

I don’t think that’s quite true. A lot of graduate managers go through operational areas for a few months at least where they have to do shift work. Often however they only had a fleeting idea and it was many years ago. And much of the senior team may not be graduate managers and have come from other sectors or worked up.

That wasn’t my point. My point is that it is very difficult for someone to bank the cash for overtime only to call in sick/fatigued for their normal shift. Of course with hindsight they shouldn’t have done so much overtime but by then it’s too late.

Fair enough. Yes that is an awkward conversation to have and no doubt starts some sort of discussion about the amount of overtime they’ve been doing.

No, but the shift patterns themselves were identified as a big problem. The backwards rotation in particular.

A big issue with fatigue is the lack of a consistent shift pattern. It destroys your body clock. I could always deal with working nights but the ‘continental shifts’ of four nights then four days, with minimal time between the two shift patterns, absolutely killed me. Finishing late Saturday then being in early Monday made it almost impossible to get sufficient good quality sleep. You had to wake before you were ready on the Sunday morning and you had to go to bed before you were ready on the Sunday evening.

You don’t have to tell me that there are issues with shift patterns and the possibility of fatigue! Good roster plans do not have things that you mentioned and have adequate RDs after nights to “switch back” your sleep rhythm. The backwards rotation that many train crew do over the Sunday is fairly awful and was something I already raised an issue further up in the thread.

Most drivers however don’t do nights very often, although arguably they are even worse because there are some very early starts and some very late finishes involved. The nature of the industry means these will always exist, and why the unions should - and normally do - play such a key role in ensuring these rosters are drafted in a way that is seen as a reasonable compromise.

But it becomes problematic if someone starts filling in those RDs which have been well planned with so much overtime but without breaking Hidden, because the fatigue matrix doesn’t work then. One or two overtime shifts here or there is okay, but this driver took it to extremes. And this is where I say there is some level of personal responsibility here to be in the situation to have an incident. Can we say that this driver wouldn’t have had this incident if he hadn’t worked so many overtime shifts? No of course not. But the likelihood would probably be reduced.

Essentially I think we agree but some ownership on part of the individual is important.

 

[AlterEgo]

Can we resolve the mountain of speculation at the first pages of the thread. Why was it necessary for the driver to be arrested?

Becuase they fell asleep while driving a train and one.presumes they were arrested on suspicion of endangering safety on the railway or similar. This offence does have quite a high level of proof however.

 

[MotCO]

The backwards rotation that many train crew do over the Sunday is fairly awful and was something I already raised an issue further up in the thread.

Is a forward rotation less demanding, and if so, why is that not common practice?

 

[Merle Haggard]

Presumably backward rotation produces an extra shift over a period of time compared to a forward one (because the periods between shifts are less in the former case)

 

[Tetchytyke]

Essentially I think we agree but some ownership on part of the individual is important.

Yeah, I think we agree too, including on the role of the individual. Just because you can doesn’t mean you should. The driver isn’t blameless at all, but I do still think the primary blame rests with the managers who let him, mind.

And yes, as you also said, the lates to earlies rotation is truly awful. I don’t miss shift work one little bit. I love my 9-5 Monday-Friday now.

Is a forward rotation less demanding, and if so, why is that not common practice?

An earlies to lates rotation is definitely less demanding, you can go to bed early at the end of your early day and have a lie in at the start of your late day. You can have a solid chunk of unbroken sleep, wake up leisurely, bimble about the house before going to work.

Why don’t they use it? It’s less efficient for the employer as it adds longer gaps between shifts. That’s why so many of these ‘continental’ shift patterns have a lates to earlies rotation, even though it is awful for the person working them.

 

[MotCO]

Why don’t they use it? It’s less efficient for the employer as it adds longer gaps between shifts. That’s why so many of these ‘continental’ shift patterns have a lates to earlies rotation, even though it is awful for the person working them.

Surely, over a year, the same number of hours have to be covered, (even if it means employing some more drivers), the hourly rates paid will be the same (with the necessary unsocial hours adjustments), and therefore the total wage bill will be the same. The only difference is that the individual driver's take home pay for the year will be slightly less.

 

[Lewisham2221]

Yeah, I think we agree too, including on the role of the individual. Just because you can doesn’t mean you should. The driver isn’t blameless at all, but I do still think the primary blame rests with the managers who let him, mind.

And yes, as you also said, the lates to earlies rotation is truly awful. I don’t miss shift work one little bit. I love my 9-5 Monday-Friday now.


An earlies to lates rotation is definitely less demanding, you can go to bed early at the end of your early day and have a lie in at the start of your late day. You can have a solid chunk of unbroken sleep, wake up leisurely, bimble about the house before going to work.

Why don’t they use it? It’s less efficient for the employer as it adds longer gaps between shifts. That’s why so many of these ‘continental’ shift patterns have a lates to earlies rotation, even though it is awful for the person working them.

Most common complaint I hear from people working forward rotations is about having a late late finish immediately before rest days, thus "wasting" some of their rest day. The other one is extreme forward rotations, where they need to be waking up at 2.30am for their last early shift and then their late shift the following day sees them not going to bed until 2.30am - in other words, the late shift starts at about the time they would've been getting into bed the previous evenings.

 

[35B]

Surely, over a year, the same number of hours have to be covered, (even if it means employing some more drivers), the hourly rates paid will be the same (with the necessary unsocial hours adjustments), and therefore the total wage bill will be the same. The only difference is that the individual driver's take home pay for the year will be slightly less.

If you employ more drivers, you have more salaries to pay. That drives cost.

If you are going to adjust those salaries to hold total pay flat, there will be a different and rather unpleasant conversation to follow.

 

[MotCO]

If you employ more drivers, you have more salaries to pay. That drives cost.

If you are going to adjust those salaries to hold total pay flat, there will be a different and rather unpleasant conversation to follow.

Indeed, but surely there is a balance between providing semi-guaranteed overtime and ensuring that drivers are not overtired leading to possible accidents.

 

[PLY2AYS]

Indeed, but surely there is a balance between providing semi-guaranteed overtime and ensuring that drivers are not overtired leading to possible accidents.

Realistically no worker should have to come to work with the expectation of doing overtime.
Yes that’s an ideological aspiration, but when it comes to safety critical work, it should be first and foremost when considering fatigue management.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Dec 2025 ==

If you employ more drivers, you have more salaries to pay. That drives cost.

If you are going to adjust those salaries to hold total pay flat, there will be a different and rather unpleasant conversation to follow.

Most, if not all TOCs pay overtime at an enhanced rate. So I don’t see how employing the right number of drivers would drive cost, given that unless you’re cancelling services (which also has financial penalties at present) you’d be paying more in man power, than if you’d employ drivers on a flat salary.

You’re right however about the upset that might create for some drivers who like to work rest days. But the union aspiration is employ the right number of people for the job… and given that overtime can’t be guaranteed month to month, living within means is a more fiscally responsible approach to professional life.

I realise that this isn’t a popular way of phrasing it. But we are talking about fatigue management and drivers feeling compelled to work overtime is a big part of that issue.

 

[35B]

Indeed, but surely there is a balance between providing semi-guaranteed overtime and ensuring that drivers are not overtired leading to possible accidents.

Most, if not all TOCs pay overtime at an enhanced rate. So I don’t see how employing the right number of drivers would drive cost, given that unless you’re cancelling services (which also has financial penalties at present) you’d be paying more in man power, than if you’d employ drivers on a flat salary.

If you have to employ 10% more drivers to have all jobs covered, then your baseline payroll cost goes up by 10%. You also need to factor in the additional on-costs of having staff, including driver managers etc. That's a fixed cost, that you will pay at all times regardless of utilisation.

If you cover gaps with overtime, you are only paying the hourly cost (yes, at premium rate) of those doing the extra hours. That is frequently a lot cheaper than paying the full rate - as has been demonstrated by DfT being unwilling to pay for the increased establishments required to deliver that certainty.

I've little sympathy for those who will lose overtime - anyone who relies on discretionary payments for their core income is brave. But if you try to keep the paybill the same while getting rid of that overtime, that will mean eating into salaries - hence my comment about the union reaction.

 

[NSEWonderer]

Becuase they fell asleep while driving a train and one.presumes they were arrested on suspicion of endangering safety on the railway or similar. This offence does have quite a high level of proof however.

But the BTP didn't find the driver asleep on the controls to clear that up. So that wouldn't have been deduced there and then unless the Driver mentioned anything about feeling tired during interview. They'd have probably gone on tge suspicion of Alcohol or Drugs potentially being the cause first.

 

[takno]

Most, if not all TOCs pay overtime at an enhanced rate. So I don’t see how employing the right number of drivers would drive cost, given that unless you’re cancelling services (which also has financial penalties at present) you’d be paying more in man power, than if you’d employ drivers on a flat salary.

In addition to the usual very significant costs of recruitment and ongoing employment, there is an extremely long unproductive paid training period at the start of employment, and an ongoing cost to retaining route and traction knowledge. The TOCs should certainly be hiring more people and depending less on overtime, but even at a heavily-enhanced rate it's still quite likely cheaper to use staff on overtime than to hire more people.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Surely, over a year, the same number of hours have to be covered, (even if it means employing some more drivers), the hourly rates paid will be the same (with the necessary unsocial hours adjustments), and therefore the total wage bill will be the same.

It's usually cheaper to pay overtime rather than employ more staff.

It feels counter-intuitive, but it is because the salary paid to the staff member is only part of the overall cost of staff. Employer NI contributions are a case in point: once a person's salary goes over the upper earnings limit, the employer NI contribution for the salary above that limit drops from 8% to 2%. So if you hire an extra member of staff you might have to pay 8% employer NIC but if you pay someone overtime instead you may only have to pay 2% employer NIC. It's the same with pensions: if I recall correctly (and I am happy to be corrected on this), overtime isn't treated as pensionable pay. This means that if you hire an extra member of staff you'd have to pay pension contributions on their wages but if you pay someone overtime instead you don't. That's on top of all the other on-costs of hiring additional staff: extra HR, extra managers, extra payroll, extra uniform, etc etc.

So whilst the logical conclusion is that if you need 50 hours of work and you're paying £30/hour (for example) then it doesn't matter if you have one person or 10 people doing the job, in reality its cheaper to have fewer people doing more hours.

 

[bahnause]

Fatigue resulting from irregular shifts can be managed, but the problem might not ever be completely solved. Unless, of course, you limit yourself to 9–5 train operations. Working hours at a TOC and other employers in this sector affect employee performance. Fatigue is not always recognisable to those affected, and health variables also play a role.

The law stipulates limits in working hours for health protection. In many states, however, these values have been defined as maximum limits, but are used as targets for efficient operation. While it is legal to exploit these limits over a longer period of time, it is not in the spirit of the inventor.

Maintaining a balanced shift schedule is difficult, not least due to variable demand. There will always be times, when more or fewer staff are needed.

The 'problem' of forward and backward rotations has already been addressed. As mentioned, it is usually beneficial for the employer to plan a backward rotation from late to early shifts. However, the same applies to employees. We have been working in this 'unhealthy' way for years and most people do not want to change anything. The irregular shifts already affects our private lives. Switching to forward rotation would reduce the amount of high-quality, continuous leisure time and replace it with lower-quality time between shifts. Most of the workforce is not prepared to sacrifice even more of their private lives.

 

[Horizon22]

Is a forward rotation less demanding, and if so, why is that not common practice?

It is indeed, because the 'natural progression' is E-L-N, so you naturally have extra time off between the shifts, allowing for a longer sleep/rest if required.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Dec 2025 ==

Realistically no worker should have to come to work with the expectation of doing overtime.
Yes that’s an ideological aspiration, but when it comes to safety critical work, it should be first and foremost when considering fatigue management.

Nobody does (with the exception of some TOCs and their Sunday situation).

People ultimately volunteer for it. If you don't have volunteers, trains are cancelled. Pretty simple really.