Random question about PTS certification

[najaB]

I have no intention or desire to do this, but is it possible to take the PTS certification test as a private individual - ie. without an employer sending you on the course? I could see this being of use to people like (semi)professional railway photographers who want to be able to access areas not normally allowed (with permission, of course!)

 

[Journeyman]

I have no intention or desire to do this, but is it possible to take the PTS certification test as a private individual - ie. without an employer sending you on the course? I could see this being of use to people like (semi)professional railway photographers who want to be able to access areas not normally allowed (with permission, of course!)

No, you have to be sponsored. It's a massive pain, because I've wanted one where it was deemed essential for a job I wanted to apply for, but I couldn't get sponsorship anywhere.

 

[Bald Rick]

I have no intention or desire to do this, but is it possible to take the PTS certification test as a private individual - ie. without an employer sending you on the course? I could see this being of use to people like (semi)professional railway photographers who want to be able to access areas not normally allowed (with permission, of course!)

As a point of principle, PTS doesn’t allow you to do anything ‘on or near the line’ on your own except walk. So for, say, a Railways photographer, they would still need to be accompanied by, as a minimum, a Controller of Site Safety.

 

[najaB]

As a point of principle, PTS doesn’t allow you to do anything ‘on or near the line’ on your own except walk. So for, say, a Railways photographer, they would still need to be accompanied by, as a minimum, a Controller of Site Safety.

Thanks. Though I wasn't thinking about taking photos from lineside as much as accessing locations (e.g. a signal box) that require them to walk along the track.

 

[Re 4/4]

with permission, of course

I imagine that obtaining said permission would be a problem in itself.

 

[Surreytraveller]

You would only be allowed on the line in the course of your duties. If your employer required you to take photographs, they would be sponsoring your PTS

 

[Llanigraham]

Thanks. Though I wasn't thinking about taking photos from lineside as much as accessing locations (e.g. a signal box) that require them to walk along the track.

Worth noting that many signallers no longer hold PTS.

 

[Tio Terry]

If you wanted to visit a normally restricted area you could probably do so, assuming you had authorisation, using a visitors permit. This would mean you were accompanied by somebody suitably trained who would ensure your safety.

 

[ArchieWoodbine]

What I believe to be a full picutre (suffice to say, it would be prohibitively complex):

I believe you need to be sponsored by a company approved/accredited by the Sentinel scheme, who are the admininstrators of PTS qualifications. So, you couldn't just set-up a company purely the purpsoes of sponsoring your own PTS training.

If you received said sponsorship, then yes, you could pay for your own PTS training and receive it.

However, if you intended to access track-side by yourself, you would also need to have the Controller of Site Safety (COSS) and Individual Working Alone (IWA) competancies on your PTS record. These require additional training and would very unlikely be given to an individual who hasn't demonstrated an ability to use the standard PTS qualification safely first, for a number of months.

If you received all of the above, you're a COSS & IWA and have completed and submitted the required Safe System of Work (SSOW) paperwork to your PTS sponsor, then you would still have another hurdle to overcome. You would need a Network Rail (NR) padlock key to physically gain access to the infrastructure. By the book you'd been to be given one of these by Network Rail to grant you access. All of the above demonstrates that you'll be safe on the Railway; the latter is your actual legal means of gaining access to NR's track-side property. Anything else would be tresspassing.

Finally, even if you did have all of that, none of it entitles you access to operational areas such as signal boxes. To do the latter you'd need to receive approval from NR. They're unlikely to grant external parties access for photographic or heritage-interest reasons outside of pre-arranged and sporadic visits with railway interest groups (for which, none of the above would be required anyway).

 

[pdeaves]

On top of what others have said, you couldn't just turn up willy-nilly and decide to do such-and-such. There has to be a very good reason to be on the track. PTS does not authorise you to be there and wander around at will. It merely demonstrates that if you are there you can behave in a responsible safe manner according to the leadership/instructions of the COSS (which, in practice, means try not to be on the track at all!).

(Kind of what others have said, but in a different way)

 

[najaB]

Thanks for the comprehensive answer. Just on the last point:

Finally, even if you did have all of that, none of it entitles you access to operational areas such as signal boxes.

I didn't necessarily have inside operational signal boxes in mind specifically, I just used that as an example of a location that is off the railway but which you might have to walk across/along the railway to access.

 

[Tio Terry]

Thanks for the comprehensive answer. Just on the last point:
I didn't necessarily have inside operational signal boxes in mind specifically, I just used that as an example of a location that is off the railway but which you might have to walk across/along the railway to access.

Locations, such as signal boxes, that need to be accessed on a regular basis will have a safe walkway to use. This may include a telephone to use to contact the signaller if it is necessary to cross or walk along the track. An example is Reedham Swing Bridge which requires a visitor to walk across the bridge on a designated walkway to get to the former signal box, there is a telephone to use before you access the track to check if it is safe to do so.

 

[Llanigraham]

It also has to be remembered that you can have all the certificates you like, but if a signalman doesn't want you in the Box you ain't going to get in!

 

[Elecman]

It also has to be remembered that you can have all the certificates you like, but if a signalman doesn't want you in the Box you ain't going to get in!

Quite !!

 

[Jon125]

Slightly off topic but in my job I've been trying to add equipment to an EE phone mast on NR land via NR for over 7 years and still no closer having spent over £15k in the process. This is with access off a public highway and only really in a drop zone where NR has any involvement to the works being allowed due to proximity of live network other than the terms of the lease that leads to engaging with NR for consent for work we have rights to undertake, just need to follow processes.

Probably easier to have just done the works without informing them.

 

[najaB]

Probably easier to have just done the works without informing them.

They do say it's easier to get forgiveness than permission...

 

[Tio Terry]

Slightly off topic but in my job I've been trying to add equipment to an EE phone mast on NR land via NR for over 7 years and still no closer having spent over £15k in the process. This is with access off a public highway and only really in a drop zone where NR has any involvement to the works being allowed due to proximity of live network other than the terms of the lease that leads to engaging with NR for consent for work we have rights to undertake, just need to follow processes.

Probably easier to have just done the works without informing them.

At a guess - and it is a guess! - your problem is far more likely to revolve around what you are trying to install and it's possible effects on NR's GSM-R system than the physical problems and access issues.

NR's attitude, in the past, has always been to object to any changes to masts and equipment close to or on NR property because of the possibility of causing problems.

 

[Jon125]

Oh yeah jumped through those hoops and it doesn't, staff turnover seems to have been a massive factor.

 

[eman_resu]

Slightly off topic but in my job I've been trying to add equipment to an EE phone mast on NR land via NR for over 7 years and still no closer having spent over £15k in the process. This is with access off a public highway and only really in a drop zone where NR has any involvement to the works being allowed due to proximity of live network other than the terms of the lease that leads to engaging with NR for consent for work we have rights to undertake, just need to follow processes.

Probably easier to have just done the works without informing them.

Is the lease with NR? Its a pity you cant use the 'Access not to be unreasonably withheld' clauses in the contract.

 

[peteb]

In response to the OP's question: You can get a PTS if you volunteer for a heritage railway, but you'd probably find that's only for use on that specific railway. Where heritage rail and network rail overlap, eg exchange sidings I'm not certain that a heritage railway PTS is valid at all. Probably those heritage rail staff/volunteers would be sent on the sponsored training course, but would also in all probability be accompanied by a network rail contractor. However having a heritage railway PTS indicates to potential employers that you have proactively shown willing to get to grips with rail H&S issues and might demonstrate to them that you are sufficiently competent to gain a network rail PTS if they sponsored you.

 

[JonathanP]

There is no connection at all between a Network Rail PTS and that used on heritage railways.

I volunteer at a major heritage railway, and the PTS training consists of reading a booklet and taking a short multiple test, and is routine for the entire staff of a station to have a PTS certificate for the in order that they can undertake trivial tasks such as litter picking or weeding. I doubt anyone at Network Rail would be in a any way impressed that someone had it.

 

[alex17595]

I volunteer at a major heritage railway, and the PTS training consists of reading a booklet and taking a short multiple test,

The actual PTS course is not much more difficult

 

[Watershed]

Where heritage rail and network rail overlap, eg exchange sidings I'm not certain that a heritage railway PTS is valid at all.

I suppose it depends on the definition of Network Rail there (i.e. whether you are including parts of the network not in routine or passenger use), but there are certainly places where people holding (solely) heritage railway PTS qualifications go lineside on NR metals.

 

[eman_resu]

The system is designed to reduce the number of people with PTS that dont need it as part of their job role.

The current course is far simpler than when I first went through it 30 years ago, complete with additional AC and DC accreditations. Those were the days when you could go track side and assess the requirements for lookout or additional protections yourself. Not any more, as one of the previous posters has quite rightly said, you now need COSS and briefings prepared well beforehand and a good reason to be there. Track side is not a safe area and the best mitigation of risk is not to be there in the first place. The course can be dumbed down as there are more safeguards in place and utilisation of trained and experienced safety personnel.

The PTS provides no other privilege apart from confirmation that training has been provided to be able to access the railway under the direct supervision of other, more qualified personnel.

To have a heritage PTS is of no relevance to NR, you either have a PTS and appropriate COSS etc or you don't. The heritage PTS is of no relevance to any employer, the job role either requires PTS or it doesn't.

The last thing the industry needs is people fronting up with PTS, with the expectation that this provides unfettered access to trackside.

 

[Chris Hamilton]

Just to access Trackside these days requires a competent Planner (who will have done a separate course for that) to create a Safe System of Work, that will then need approved by GZAC (a formality if no blockages required, a bigger hurdle if it does). That pack then needs to be assessed by a competent Person in Charge (someone with a COSS competency familiar with the area and the task, doesn’t need to be the one carrying out the task) at least one shift prior to the work. Then the whole pack is approved by the Supervisor.

Then, on the day, a Person in Charge (can be the COSS, doesn’t have to be and is usually the most senior person in the group) will receive the pack and assign the roles and responsibilities. The COSS will then deal with safely implementing the Safe System of Work while the PIC will ensure the flow of the task.

In my team, as Team Leader I’m ALWAYS the PIC. My Technician and I will take turns about being COSS/Site Warden and our Operative, who only holds a PTS, carries some tools and himself. We can never leave the Operative on his own or allow him to be out of sight of the COSS, because PTS essentially just allows you to enter the gate accompanied. Nothing more.

A mountain of bureaucracy to scale before a single screwdriver is lifted these days. But at least COVID-19 has meant it no longer generates actual mountains of paper as we do it all electronically now.

Whether it makes the job safer or not is not for me to answer. Certainly takes more time, maybe that introduces more thought? But it goes to show, PTS literally gets you nowhere unless someone is there to hold your hand.