Reduction in minimum age for train drivers.

[bramling]

Maturity keeps coming up about being responsible enough to drive trains at such a young age. Well I was signalling them at 18.

It isn’t necessarily the maturity of actually being able to carry out the task of driving a train, but more managing some of the things which come with it, in particular shift work.

I daresay signalling isn’t quite the same, not least because it’s easier to supervise staff.

 

[dk1]

It isn’t necessarily the maturity of actually being able to carry out the task of driving a train, but more managing some of the things which come with it, in particular shift work.

I daresay signalling isn’t quite the same, not least because it’s easier to supervise staff.

I was all alone in rural boxes at the time. Decisions were all mine and I must say the solitude was difficult initially. The last 27yrs I’ve been driving trains and being an instructor for the last 14 of them, my trainees have ranged from 21 to 56.

 

[Sorcerer]

In principle I'm not against lowering the age to 18 even though I doubt many applicants so young will have enough of the relevant experience to give the employers confidence in putting them in the cab, but is this actually going to be able to address the ageing driver workforce and shortages? The job is already well paid, and it has enough applicants getting through to fill any vacancies even with most failing the initial assessments, so it has no issue attracting people to apply. But what good is that if there aren't enough instructors or places on courses to teach these drivers before they build careers elsewhere or their talent bank time limit runs out?

Many on the Avanti trainee driver threads passed through the interview stages but have been waiting since 2023, and several depots were prioritised over others which meant some people started earlier than others. ASLEF claims to represent about 22,000 drivers across the country, so if 25-30% are due to retire within 5 years that's about 6,500-7,000 drivers leaving the industry. Not easy to replace that amount if you only get about 100 people on courses every year, especially when it will already take two years to train them to full competence.

 

[SPADTrap]

My nephew opted to be an airline pilot, did A levels, went to flight school, started work as a pilot First Officer for EasyJet when he was 19 (which was about 8 years ago).

Bit of a silly anomaly that you can fly a plane with passengers at 19 in UK, but couldn't drive a train. Perhaps bigger question is why rail has been different for at least a decade.

As someone who did the same but is now driving trains, the significant difference which was never lost on me is in your nephews scenario, he wasn't alone in doing so. There's often this analogy made but it's not quite that simple. Train drivers are alone, it's quite a difference and not an anomaly. Put your 19 year old nephew in the left hand seat and you're closer to how a train driver operates, captain and FO in one.

And it relies on HR these days so everythings screwed.

It will be interesting to see how the policy plays out.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It really sounds to me like a headline-grabbing, easy announcement that makes it look like the Government are doing something, all the while they're not doing the difficult work to tackle the actual cause of the problem (the blockage in training).

 

[Stossgebet]

Because the guards role is very much different to the drivers role?

But all roles are different. But any role that had a foundation of rules, rules which apply to other grades or complement/co-ordinate with other roles, gives the employee a foundational understanding, and the employer an established employment record.

I really really don't 'understand' for want of a better word. Those people that talk as if other grades are beneath them. As if it is train driving or nothing. To me that speaks of ambition, of course, but weighted with an attitude perhaps of indifference to the industry and those other roles. Which doesn't set a good tone in my opinion.

 

[Towers]

I was all alone in rural boxes at the time. Decisions were all mine and I must say the solitude was difficult initially. The last 27yrs I’ve been driving trains and being an instructor for the last 14 of them, my trainees have ranged from 21 to 56.

Roughly, how long ago was this?

Commendable though that is, in today’s society I’d be rather concerned at the scourge of social media, for example. It would be a committed 18 year old who in the age of everyone being glued to their phones was truly prepared to spend their shift in solitude. There is also the financial issue - plenty are attracted primarily for the salary, but currently will have some level of life experience and maturity to understand the compromises they are making in return for that. Would a school leaver truly appreciate that?

Again, these are risks the industry will have to take if TOCs genuinely do want to emply ‘straight from school’. The problem comes if those risks only develop into an issue after you’ve spent 18 months training somebody, or worse still only when they have an operational incident as a result of them.

I’m not sure if anyone has said the dirty words yet, but you also have to wonder if this is related to money. The railway has already begun going down the apprenticeship route for driving grades, is this related? Perhaps in an effort to bring the age profile more in line with what one may traditionally associate with apprentices? Stagger the wages, so that they remain lower for longer, because the age profile makes it possible? Will an army of 19 year olds want to join Aslef and fight for their predocessors’ conditions?

This is surely one of the most sought after jobs in the country!?

 

[43066]

In principle I'm not against lowering the age to 18 even though I doubt many applicants so young will have enough of the relevant experience to give the employers confidence in putting them in the cab, but is this actually going to be able to address the ageing driver workforce and shortages? The job is already well paid, and it has enough applicants getting through to fill any vacancies even with most failing the initial assessments, so it has no issue attracting people to apply. But what good is that if there aren't enough instructors or places on courses to teach these drivers before they build careers elsewhere or their talent bank time limit runs out?

Many on the Avanti trainee driver threads passed through the interview stages but have been waiting since 2023, and several depots were prioritised over others which meant some people started earlier than others. ASLEF claims to represent about 22,000 drivers across the country, so if 25-30% are due to retire within 5 years that's about 6,500-7,000 drivers leaving the industry. Not easy to replace that amount if you only get about 100 people on courses every year, especially when it will already take two years to train them to full competence.

This is a very valid point. The average is something like 47 but I’m not quite sure how that’s calculated. There will be a significant number waiting to retire - certainly 10%+ of my current depot would be in the bracket if “retiring within five years”, and it has taken well over a year to get around 12 qualified drivers fully productive for various reasons (that is exceptionally bad even by railway standards!)

I really really don't 'understand' for want of a better word. Those people that talk as if other grades are beneath them. As if it is train driving or nothing. To me that speaks of ambition, of course, but weighted with an attitude perhaps of indifference to the industry and those other roles. Which doesn't set a good tone in my opinion.

Not that it’s “beneath” them but for me, along with many others, I couldn’t have afforded the pay cut to become a guard (I was on more than driver money before joining the industry) and simply didn’t want to do anything other than driving. So it was very much train driving or nothing, in the sense that I wouldn’t have joined the industry otherwise (possibly I’d have looked at signalling, but certainly nothing public facing).

 

[43066]

But all roles are different. But any role that had a foundation of rules, rules which apply to other grades or complement/co-ordinate with other roles, gives the employee a foundational understanding, and the employer an established employment record.

As noted above - if you actually speak to some driver trainers, their worst nightmare is often ex guards who think they know it all. They often prefer a blank canvas with no preconceived ideas.

 

[Western Lord]

In view of the abysmal accident record of 18-21 year old car drivers, this is not an announcement that fills me with confidence.

 

[Lewisham2221]

In view of the abysmal accident record of 18-21 year old car drivers, this is not an announcement that fills me with confidence.

I'm pretty sure that a 19 year old train driver won't have 4 of their mates along for the ride, along with "tunes" blaring and a can of nitrous oxide and some balloons.

It all seems to be much ado about nothing, from both sides. It's not a change that strikes me as urgently needed - it's not exactly like there was a shortage of people wanting to be train drivers, so it's a bit of a bizarre one to make a big story out of. On the other hand, given all of the hurdles that need jumping to actually get the job, it's not exactly like we're suddenly going to see a huge influx of 18 year olds driving trains - realistically it's going to be a handful (at best) of people who are year or two younger than the current minimum age, who will have still gone through exactly the same selection and training processes as everybody else.

 

[furnessvale]

Because the guards role is very much different to the drivers role?

The driver's role may be different but the person is the same.

As an employer I would prefer to have a pool of people already working for me, that I knew, and had been assessing for 3 or more years. With incoming legislation making it more difficult to fire someone from day one, that is putting an awful lot of reliance on the recruitment process which at best covers a total of a few days and more likely can be counted in hours.

 

[Bradford PA]

The driver's role may be different but the person is the same.

As an employer I would prefer to have a pool of people already working for me, that I knew, and had been assessing for 3 or more years. With incoming legislation making it more difficult to fire someone from day one, that is putting an awful lot of reliance on the recruitment process which at best covers a total of a few days and more likely can be counted in hours.

Exactly. If an 18-year old started as station, revenue, guard or signalling staff in a properly managed position then within three years they would have accumulated loads of valid and checkable experience of shift work, health & safety, public relations, etc. All of this would provide a suitable background for moving on into driver training at a later stage if they so desired.

 

[43066]

it's not exactly like there was a shortage of people wanting to be train drivers, so it's a bit of a bizarre one to make a big story out of.

Indeed - so the question then becomes why is it being trumpeted as a solution to (self inflicted by the industry/DfT) driver shortages? I suspect it’s more political spin as indicated above.

The driver's role may be different but the person is the same.

As an employer I would prefer to have a pool of people already working for me, that I knew, and had been assessing for 3 or more years. With incoming legislation making it more difficult to fire someone from day one, that is putting an awful lot of reliance on the recruitment process which at best covers a total of a few days and more likely can be counted in hours.

This assumes that performance in the prior role is any guide to performance in the new role - experience shows that in many cases it isn’t. It also creates a vacancy in the first role you then have to backfill. Yes the person already employed is a “known quantity”, but a lot can equally be discovered by reference checks on someone from outside, and only hiring those with solid employment histories.

Certainly guards at my operator have had a “mixed” experience of getting onto driving courses, and there have been plenty of “unofficial” suggestions that the company prefers to look outside. A few have even left to get a key elsewhere and then returned. Like it or not, there is no longer a “line of promotion” to driving as there was under BR. The decision of operators to move away from that presumably didn’t happen by accident…

 

[Peter Mugridge]

There are loads of applications for train drivers, why not just accept more, odd!

The vast majority of applicants don't get past the initial psychometric tests, so there's very few who they can accept.

 

[duffield]

There is the consideration that at present, the (admittedly possibly small but not insignificant) number of very keen and suitable candidates for driver positions who leave school at 18 will have to find other jobs at that point and may not feel able to disrupt their life once train driving becomes an option at 21.

 

[Horizon22]

Hundreds of people apply for most train driver roles - one thing there isn’t is a shortage of candidates. This will make a marginal difference, even if standardising it to the adult age is perfectly reasonable.

The major issue is slow recruitment, minuscule recruitment teams, difficulty arranging suitable class sizes and personnel to staff them and limited desire/incentive for drivers to be instructors which all leads to a backlog.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 May 2025 ==

The driver's role may be different but the person is the same.

As an employer I would prefer to have a pool of people already working for me, that I knew, and had been assessing for 3 or more years. With incoming legislation making it more difficult to fire someone from day one, that is putting an awful lot of reliance on the recruitment process which at best covers a total of a few days and more likely can be counted in hours.

That won’t be the case. Removing someone within probation will still be easy. The legislation I believe targets how easy it is currently to still fire someone of under 2 years service.

 

[DMckduck]

The vast majority of applicants don't get past the initial psychometric tests, so there's very few who they can accept.

The jobs forum on here says a different story though, seems to be full of people waiting for a course, stuck in a talent pool or waiting months/years for the MMI/DMI.

The shortage in drivers is inevitable and won't be stopped unless the current backlog and bottlenecks can be corrected.

The better question would be, how can this be achieved?

 

[Pintman]

Hundreds of people apply for most train driver roles - one thing there isn’t is a shortage of candidates. This will make a marginal difference, even if standardising it to the adult age is perfectly reasonable.

My thoughts exactly, this won't actually solve any problems, but it looks to people outside of the railways that the government is doing something

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 May 2025 ==

The jobs forum on here says a different story though, seems to be full of people waiting for a course, stuck in a talent pool or waiting months/years for the MMI/DMI.

But for every story that gets posted on here, there are loads that aren't. Lots of people talk on here about being successful, very few talk about where they fell down. Something of a selection bias in the data on this forum

 

[greatkingrat]

If you have 1000 applications, then even if 90% fail at some point, you still have 100 candidates left, which is likely more than enough to fill all the vacancies.

 

[Red Devil]

The jobs forum on here says a different story though, seems to be full of people waiting for a course, stuck in a talent pool or waiting months/years for the MMI/DMI.

The shortage in drivers is inevitable and won't be stopped unless the current backlog and bottlenecks can be corrected.

The better question would be, how can this be achieved?

This in a nutshell. Railway HR akin to Fred Karno's circus.
I can speak only of Northern. Instructor's on the West are paid an increment of £28pw before stoppages. I did it certainly not for the money. I've just finished with a trainee and they will be my last one, giving up the role. As much as I enjoyed it I need some "me time "

 

[Whisky Papa]

This in a nutshell. Railway HR akin to Fred Karno's circus.
I can speak only of Northern. Instructor's on the West are paid an increment of £28pw before stoppages. I did it certainly not for the money. I've just finished with a trainee and they will be my last one, giving up the role. As much as I enjoyed it I need some "me time "

I can only agree with your second sentence - my own recruitment to Northern as booking office staff was something of a marathon - followed by a sprint when the date for the training course was announced only a week in advance. As I was unemployed it made no odds to me, but other trainees had to leave their exisiting jobs without giving their due notice, which is hardly fair practice.

I think the public might reasonably expect, if their 18 year old son/daughter was just finishing sixth form or college in July, that they would be able to go through the selection process and start work on, say, the 1st October. Unless of course they (parent or applicant) were a reader of these forums and had picked up that they might be waiting several months in limbo.

 

[Economist]

I get the impression that the interested parties (DfT, TOCs, ASLEF) want something that looks good in the media, like many grand announcements in the media it won't have a big impact because I presume the vast majority of trainees will continue to be over 21. There will no doubt be a huge fanfare when the first 18/19 year old gets their key and an almost as big a fanfare when the first one makes the headlines as a result of some error or indiscretion.

As has been said earlier in the thread, there's very few other jobs where you have the train driving levels of responsibility whilst working alone.

 

[Horizon22]

I get the impression that the interested parties (DfT, TOCs, ASLEF) want something that looks good in the media, like many grand announcements in the media it won't have a big impact because I presume the vast majority of trainees will continue to be over 21. There will no doubt be a huge fanfare when the first 18/19 year old gets their key and an almost as big a fanfare when the first one makes the headlines as a result of some error or indiscretion.

I highly doubt it. Such disciplinary actions and/or development plans are rarely - if ever - made public.

 

[AlterEgo]

I’m firmly in the camp that 18 is too young. Youths need time in their lives to be youths, whatever form that may take, and leaving school straight into a driving job is not likely to be ideal for the majority, I would think.

Train driving isn’t a job which appeals or is suited to the majority. You can train to be an officer in the Royal Marines at 18 - it’s not what everyone will do, but that’s why there’s an open selection process.

 

[Horizon22]

Train driving isn’t a job which appeals or is suited to the majority. You can train to be an officer in the Royal Marines at 18 - it’s not what everyone will do, but that’s why there’s an open selection process.

It might not be suited to the majority, but it appeals to a lot. Hence the number of applicants which for trainee drivers and intercity operators is often over 1000.

 

[DMckduck]

My thoughts exactly, this won't actually solve any problems, but it looks to people outside of the railways that the government is doing something

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 May 2025 ==


But for every story that gets posted on here, there are loads that aren't. Lots of people talk on here about being successful, very few talk about where they fell down. Something of a selection bias in the data on this forum

This is true, but also having candidates in talent pools for months or years at a time, whilst also stating a driver shortage coming doesnt exactly make sense.

DI's need to be paid more and the job made more attractive, the whole recruitment process needs an overhaul in my opinion. If theres a shortage and it's known about, tocs should not be looking to fill talent pools.

 

[Horizon22]

This is true, but also having candidates in talent pools for months or years at a time, whilst also stating a driver shortage coming doesnt exactly make sense.

DI's need to be paid more and the job made more attractive, the whole recruitment process needs an overhaul in my opinion. If theres a shortage and it's known about, tocs should not be looking to fill talent pools.

If I was lord and master of TOCs, I would immediately double the size of recruitment teams. Both internally and externally, this is a major pain for all hiring managers. It costs a lot in terms of the process being drawn out and having to fill vacancies with overtime.

 

[baz962]

The MMI questions are more geared towards life skills which younger people just wont have yet. Even quite a few older people don't have them!:

1. Describe a time when you followed rules and procedures
2. Describe a time when you have solved a difficult problem
3. Describe a time when you have been on a training course over 2weeks or greatest achievement
4. Describe a time when you have handled an emergency situation
5. Describe a time when you have worked for long periods of time alone
6. Describe a role you do similar to a train driver?

To be honest I think many people overthink these. As a young person you follow rules and procedures at home and school , maybe if you were in a sports team or the Scouts or Brownies. A difficult problem could be anything again at school or home.
Training course could be something like driving lessons or achievement could be getting a driver license or winning a sports trophy. Etc .

 

[Pintman]

Hate these behavioural interview questions. If they're released in advance, then they just reward the academic. If (more likely in general, I don't know about specifics of MMI) they're used on the spot then for those of us whose memory isn't indexed that way they're impossible to answer without racking through everything that ever happened in our life until finding one that vaguely answers the question.

They're not released in advance by RSSB, they're released in advance by people talking about them on here!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 May 2025 ==

The MMI is black and white though, it's looking for specific requirements the candidate either has or hasn't. The recruiter scores it to the OPC standards, not his/her own standards.

*RSSB standards