Overuse of "Waiting at Signal" button?

[ComUtoR]

You do know that the Network Rail CCF and other systems are used to work out where the delay was caused.

Yes, I fully understand that.

Unless the TOC and Network Rail are having a disagreement.

Precisely !!

Delay attribution goes back and forth. It's a strange and crazy tennis match. When checking the data, it's quite insane with what's involved.

TINs getting referred back and forth and constant challenges and referrals are just part and parcel of the daily running of 'The Railway'. TBVFH, it's disgraceful that this stupid money-go-round exists.

Wether or not SG gets pressed shouldn't matter, but it does. 'Signaller A' might say that the Driver didn't SG as per the rulebook and therefore they should accept the delay but 'Driver A' says that they pressed SG and the signal didn't clear till +2 so NR takes the hit.

Somedays I sit here and wonder how much the industry could save by culling every delay attribution department. I know for a fact we have more 'Performance Managers' than 'HR Managers'

 

[Annetts key]

Precisely !!

Delay attribution goes back and forth. It's a strange and crazy tennis match. When checking the data, it's quite insane with what's involved.

TINs getting referred back and forth and constant challenges and referrals are just part and parcel of the daily running of 'The Railway'. TBVFH, it's disgraceful that this stupid money-go-round exists.

Wether or not SG gets pressed shouldn't matter, but it does. 'Signaller A' might say that the Driver didn't SG as per the rulebook and therefore they should accept the delay but 'Driver A' says that they pressed SG and the signal didn't clear till +2 so NR takes the hit.

Somedays I sit here and wonder how much the industry could save by culling every delay attribution department. I know for a fact we have more 'Performance Managers' than 'HR Managers'

Yes, I agree.

Infrastructure maintenance also play pin pong against operations with the delay figures, as well as with the TOCs and FOCs.

This is one of the reasons why I think it would be better if it was all one single company.

 

[zwk500]

Yes, I agree.

Infrastructure maintenance also play pin pong against operations with the delay figures, as well as with the TOCs and FOCs.

This is one of the reasons why I think it would be better if it was all one single company.

Given the amount of disputes I saw between different departments on NR, there is nothing to suggest bring back to a single company will improve matters.

 

[Annetts key]

Given the amount of disputes I saw between different departments on NR, there is nothing to suggest bring back to a single company will improve matters.

You’ve not seen me bite the head off whichever manger it is going on about it then. As I like to point out, it’s all Network Rail’s money, not the manager’s money.

If they were forced to spend money on better maintenance of the infrastructure, or on improving the infrastructure, maybe it would have some meaning. But as it is, just changing the figures in a ‘budget’ (which they normally all overspend on anyway) is just pointless.

And anyway, normally it’s the S&T that take most of the hit.

 

[zwk500]

You’ve not seen me bite the head off whichever manger it is going on about it then. As I like to point out, it’s all Network Rail’s money, not the manager’s money.

If they were forced to spend money on better maintenance of the infrastructure, or on improving the infrastructure, maybe it would have some meaning. But as it is, just changing the figures in a ‘budget’ (which they normally all overspend on anyway) is just pointless.

And anyway, normally it’s the S&T that take most of the hit.

I share you view - but many managers are very defensive of their budgets and targets. It's one of the reasons why I disliked departments being given specific Minutes/incidents targets to hit rather than an 'ALARP' approach.

However having targets you can review from a spreadsheet makes senior manager's jobs easier as they don't have to make value judgements, which would require understanding of how the delay actually happened (and therefore how you can stop it from happening/mitigate when it does!)

 

[ComUtoR]

And anyway, normally it’s the S&T that take most of the hit.

Cause it's always broken

 

[Annetts key]

Cause it's always broken

Never! It’s just ‘resting’
Here’s an example:
August 2021, a point failure resulted in over two thousand eight hundred minutes delay costing over three hundred thousand pounds.

 

[Meerkat]

If they were forced to spend money on better maintenance of the infrastructure, or on improving the infrastructure, maybe it would have some meaning.

How would they know its the infrastructure that is the problem without delay attribution?

 

[zwk500]

How would they know its the infrastructure that is the problem without delay attribution?

The issue is that they don't attribute properly because they're more concerned about managing their 'delay minutes payment' budget than getting accurate reports to create targeted investment/renewals plans. (Sorry if I've jumped on your reasoning, @Annetts key)

 

[Meerkat]

The issue is that they don't attribute properly because they're more concerned about managing their 'delay minutes payment' budget than getting accurate reports to create targeted investment/renewals plans. (Sorry if I've jumped on your reasoning, @Annetts key)

I don't understand how that makes a difference - are you saying the minutes end up in the wrong place? who is accepting them?

 

[zwk500]

I don't understand how that makes a difference - are you saying the minutes end up in the wrong place?

Yes. Unbelievable as it may seem, delays do get misattributed. Sometimes it's because a person doesn't want to accept they made a mistake, sometimes it's because the root cause is unclear and sometimes it's because of people playing silly games.

who is accepting them?

Whoever's holding it when the music stops. There are timescales to delay disputes.

 

[Annetts key]

The issue is that they don't attribute properly because they're more concerned about managing their 'delay minutes payment' budget than getting accurate reports to create targeted investment/renewals plans. (Sorry if I've jumped on your reasoning, @Annetts key)

Yes, exactly.

If you want to improve things, you actually have to do something constructive. Sometimes the railway does do this. But often it’s just a blame game. Playing the blame game (mostly) does not help the passengers or other railway customers (freight, road users) and does not help the railways reputation.

Here’s a simple example, people trespassing on the railway causes a large amount of delay to trains overall. Now, the powers that be have realised (at least in my part of the world) that installing better fences in known problem areas helps. Before, all resulting delay costs were just attributed to trespass incidents, with no action being taken.

Anyway, sorry about derailing the topic. We will convene a off topic attribution committee shortly…

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Mar 2023 ==

I don't understand how that makes a difference - are you saying the minutes end up in the wrong place? who is accepting them?

Yes, but who decides where is the right place, when no one wants the cost?

 

[Meerkat]

Yes, but who decides where is the right place, when no one wants the cost?

Does the structure not have an escalation and dispute resolution process?

 

[Annetts key]

Does the structure not have an escalation and dispute resolution process?

Yes, but at some point, a decision has to be made.
Network Rail and the TOCs & FOCs all have dedicated teams for this.

But this all costs money.

 

[Meerkat]

Yes, but at some point, a decision has to be made.
Network Rail and the TOCs & FOCs all have dedicated teams for this.

But this all costs money.

Surely that is eventually the job for the bod at the pinnacle of the structure?
It costs money but I don't see an alternative.

 

[Annetts key]

Surely that is eventually the job for the bod at the pinnacle of the structure?
It costs money but I don't see an alternative.

The technology on helping to to investigate train delay has moved on considerably, but BR did (despite what the newspapers may have said) take the issues of train delay and the causes seriously. The stated objective, as told to every new employee on the S&T on Western Region when they attended their induction course, was to get to zero signalling (including points, track circuits and all other equipment) failures.

You don’t need the current attribution system to reduce the causes of train delays, let alone argue over who pays…

 

[Meerkat]

You don’t need the current attribution system to reduce the causes of train delays, let alone argue over who pays…

How else are you going to do it?

 

[Annetts key]

How else are you going to do it?

As I said in post #162, instead of playing the blame game, the railways try to fix the problems. If there are multiple causes, all departments look to take action.

 

[Meerkat]

As I said in post #162, instead of playing the blame game, the railways try to fix the problems. If there are multiple causes, all departments look to take action.

How do you prioritise the allocation of budget to pay for these actions?

 

[sw1ller]

Can only say what I do, as I’m no longer an instructor but if it’s a random signal, I press it straight away as per my manager telling me not to wait a minute or two! If I see the section is blocked somehow, I don’t press it at all and if I’m going from red to red then I will use my common sense wether or not to press it at the first red, but never at the following reds. As far as I’m concerned, the signaller knows I’m there and the SG has recorded the delay for attribution purposes. Never, ever press it whilst still moving. That’s just arrogant.

 

[Sunset route]

Maybe a good chunk of this thread needs moving into a separate delay attribution thread so it can get back on topic?

 

[Annetts key]

How do you prioritise the allocation of budget to pay for these actions?

If it’s Network Rail, the RAM already has some funds for improvement or higher maintenance levels (although going forward, this money may disappear with the current cutting costs agenda).

The vast majority of delays and cancellations are due to problems that are already known about.

 

[Meerkat]

If it’s Network Rail, the RAM already has some funds for improvement or higher maintenance levels (although going forward, this money may disappear with the current cutting costs agenda).

The vast majority of delays and cancellations are due to problems that are already known about.

You haven't answered the question, but this is wandering off topic.

 

[godfreycomplex]

Maybe a good chunk of this thread needs moving into a separate delay attribution thread so it can get back on topic?

To truly get the spirit of delay attribution a good chunk of this thread needs to be batted about between threads for the best past of year before ending up in completely the wrong one

(An attribution based joke)

 

[Tester]

To truly get the spirit of delay attribution a good chunk of this thread needs to be batted about between threads for the best past of year before ending up in completely the wrong one

(An attribution based joke)

Chapeau

 

[Falcon1200]

Somedays I sit here and wonder how much the industry could save by culling every delay attribution department.

If the railway does not investigate and record the causes of delays, how can performance be improved?

The technology on helping to to investigate train delay has moved on considerably, but BR did (despite what the newspapers may have said) take the issues of train delay and the causes seriously.

Indeed, one of my first jobs in Control was investigating and explaining delays on the ECML and WCML - in 1984. And performance recording is far more rigorous now that it was then, pre-Trust; For example, Down expresses into Glasgow Central had their arrival times calculated by adding 7 minutes to the passing time at Cambuslang, if Control was not advised or aware of a delay after that point it went unrecorded.

 

[ComUtoR]

If the railway does not investigate and record the causes of delays, how can performance be improved?

There is a difference between looking at ways to improve performance and the needless delay attribution culture where you kick around delays because of the cost, not to improve performance.

We all know why the train was delayed. Does it really matter who pays for it or should it be about how we can improve it ?

 

[Meerkat]

We all know why the train was delayed.

Do you? How? If it was that obvious it couldn’t be kicked about.

Does it really matter who pays for it

It’s rather an incentive to fix stuff

 

[Annetts key]

Do you? How? If it was that obvious it couldn’t be kicked about.

Long before it gets to the delay attribution, in the majority of cases, it is already known what the primary cause(s) are most likely to be.

A lot of the disagreements are over knock on delays.

It’s rather an incentive to fix stuff

Not if you can argue away the delay. Pick enough holes in the decisions of the other parties and maybe you can wriggle out of accepting any significant delay, then you don’t pay as much.

Also, each party has a budget for delay payments, so if the number and amount of delay payments is within the budget, where is the incentive to “fix stuff”. Especially if “fixing it” would cost more than paying for the delays once you have managed to wriggle out of accepting all of the delay.

So let me make it crystal clear. Of course the reasons for a train being delayed or cancelled (including part cancelled) should be investigated. I have no problem with the principles of this part of the system.

But the rest of it, where all parties blame each other and try to wriggle out of paying for it is a total waste of resources. If they put as much effort into “fixing” issues as they do in trying to wriggle out of it, the railways would be in a better place.

 

[alxndr]

It’s rather an incentive to fix stuff

It‘s an incentive to try to pass the buck.

My priority at a fault should be ”lets fix that” not “lets make sure I get a good clear photo so my manager can make p-way take the blame and the delay.” I’m often asked to do the latter, although it has a habit of slipping my mind… even in the interview for my latest job we had a discussion on the “value” of taking photographs to be able to challenge delay attribution. They wanted someone who would help them play the game.

It might often amount to doing the right thing, but for all the wrong reasons, and doesn’t encourage openness and collaborative working between departments because instead of truly trying to understand and rectify the root cause they’re trying to prove that it wasn’t them and find someone else to blame. A ”no blame culture” approach would be a lot more productive IMO.