Thoughts please failed 2nd MMI

[JamesTT]

Firstly I know this post will sound like sour grapes but I don't feel that way I just want to give my view.

I went for a trainee driver's job last year and past all of the 'practical' parts of the assessment process. I then past a line manager interview and from the feedback was told by HR. I had impressed the managers and they were looking forward to working with me. Unfortunately I totally screwed up my MMI. I knew within the first few minutes I had messed up but soldiered on. I was not surprised to hear that I had failed, but was disappointed in the feedback. The feedback consisted of a one word answer 'communication'. Anyway 6 months later I retook the MMI, having passed a line manager interview with another depot. Sadly I failed that MMI as well. I did feel it went better and the feedback was I improved but still fell short on the communication aspect. I did get more detailed feedback, however the criticism was I over the elaborated answers.
Now I know that these are comments usually made by people who don't progress but some people have trotted out the following mantra.
'You only progress if your face fits'. I am aware that the driver assessments are basically a pyschological test of one's suitability to do the role. Having passed all tests and a DM interview I would have thought that my suitability was pretty much without question. Is it the case that actually the MMI is the real test? Also I fell down on the communication aspect. My question is surely during the training. Trainee drivers whilst under supervision of their DI etc. Will be in scenarios where they communicate with the following. Signaller, conductor, manager and other staff. Surely improving how one communicates with these people is part of the training? Is more the case that the MMI is the real test of if ones face fits, lets say from a psychological point of view? If this is the case would it not be fairer to say. Yes you have passed all these tests however we don't deem you suitable and this is why, giving more in depth feed back and in addition what roles ones personality type they feel would be akin to

 

[Jydo]

I sat my MMI last week and it went really well, we spent maybe 8mins or so on each question & even at the end she was happy to go through some of my tests results to give me as much feedback as possible. Happy to say that I passed but she did say to me you were a little bit nervy but we as a company are prepared to overlook this. I suppose whether you pass or fail has a large part to do with the interviewer themselves and how they 'walk you through' the whole interview itself. Luckily I had already dealt & spoke to the specific interviewer in my process so I already had a repoire with them which was lucky for me. I think if I went straight into the interview with a stranger I would have been more nervy. I would say a large part of how I passed was down to the interviewer themselves (even though I had good answers & gave a good account of myself).

The feedback you received could have been alot better & informative, sorry you didnt pass......

 

[E&W Lucas]

"Over elaborate" - ie you waffled on, when the requirement is to be concise and clear.

You have to have this ability at the start of the process. The training is how to phrase things in the accepted industry format.

Sorry you didn't pass, but please accept that the role is not for you. This is a totally transparent process. There's plenty of other jobs within the industry, and I hope you find a role that suits. Good luck.

 

[MichaelAMW]

Firstly I know this post will sound like sour grapes but I don't feel that way I just want to give my view.

I went for a trainee driver's job last year and past all of the 'practical' parts of the assessment process. I then past a line manager interview and from the feedback was told by HR. I had impressed the managers and they were looking forward to working with me. Unfortunately I totally screwed up my MMI. I knew within the first few minutes I had messed up but soldiered on. I was not surprised to hear that I had failed, but was disappointed in the feedback. The feedback consisted of a one word answer 'communication'. Anyway 6 months later I retook the MMI, having passed a line manager interview with another depot. Sadly I failed that MMI as well. I did feel it went better and the feedback was I improved but still fell short on the communication aspect. I did get more detailed feedback, however the criticism was I over the elaborated answers.
Now I know that these are comments usually made by people who don't progress but some people have trotted out the following mantra.
'You only progress if your face fits'. I am aware that the driver assessments are basically a pyschological test of one's suitability to do the role. Having passed all tests and a DM interview I would have thought that my suitability was pretty much without question. Is it the case that actually the MMI is the real test? Also I fell down on the communication aspect. My question is surely during the training. Trainee drivers whilst under supervision of their DI etc. Will be in scenarios where they communicate with the following. Signaller, conductor, manager and other staff. Surely improving how one communicates with these people is part of the training? Is more the case that the MMI is the real test of if ones face fits, lets say from a psychological point of view? If this is the case would it not be fairer to say. Yes you have passed all these tests however we don't deem you suitable and this is why, giving more in depth feed back and in addition what roles ones personality type they feel would be akin to

I think I'd say two things. First, in fact you haven't passed all the tests to demonstrate your suitability as you haven't passsed this MMI interview stage. Yes, everything else is fine but not this last bit. You need to pass them all - in my case I'm in the same position as you because I would fail the medical for a specific reason so, even if I passed everything else, there would remain an unticked box. They are all equally important in the sense that all are required. Secondly, there are two thresholds for getting *any* job: you have to (i) meet the required standard and (ii) be better than all the other candidates. You can control the first one to an extent but not the second, but because there are so many applicants for train driver the required standard can be set to be rather high, which means loads of proverbial hoops to jump through. In my public-sector recruitment experience I just feel lucky if we have *anyone* worth appointing and we do indeed accept there is a need to train people for their required skills; driver recruitment doesn't need to do this as there will always be someone who already ticks all the boxes from start.

As E&W Lucas says, you need to focus on where you can make a good contribution to something and try to move on. That may take a while - I felt the sting for a whole year once after a failed job attempt - but something else turns up to engage you adequately.

 

[notadriver]

What public sector experience are you talking about if you don't mind me asking MichaelAMW?

 

[MichaelAMW]

What public sector experience are you talking about if you don't mind me asking MichaelAMW?

Civil service and recruitment of teachers as a school governor. The underlying point is that there are, going by what has been reported on the Forum, hundreds of applicants for these driver posts whereas I have dealt with situations where the number of even half suitable candidates, or even actual applicants for some teaching jobs, would barely stretch the resources offered by the fingers of one hand!

 

[red2005]

Firstly I know this post will sound like sour grapes but I don't feel that way I just want to give my view.

I went for a trainee driver's job last year and past all of the 'practical' parts of the assessment process. I then past a line manager interview and from the feedback was told by HR. I had impressed the managers and they were looking forward to working with me. Unfortunately I totally screwed up my MMI. I knew within the first few minutes I had messed up but soldiered on. I was not surprised to hear that I had failed, but was disappointed in the feedback. The feedback consisted of a one word answer 'communication'. Anyway 6 months later I retook the MMI, having passed a line manager interview with another depot. Sadly I failed that MMI as well. I did feel it went better and the feedback was I improved but still fell short on the communication aspect. I did get more detailed feedback, however the criticism was I over the elaborated answers.
Now I know that these are comments usually made by people who don't progress but some people have trotted out the following mantra.
'You only progress if your face fits'. I am aware that the driver assessments are basically a pyschological test of one's suitability to do the role. Having passed all tests and a DM interview I would have thought that my suitability was pretty much without question. Is it the case that actually the MMI is the real test? Also I fell down on the communication aspect. My question is surely during the training. Trainee drivers whilst under supervision of their DI etc. Will be in scenarios where they communicate with the following. Signaller, conductor, manager and other staff. Surely improving how one communicates with these people is part of the training? Is more the case that the MMI is the real test of if ones face fits, lets say from a psychological point of view? If this is the case would it not be fairer to say. Yes you have passed all these tests however we don't deem you suitable and this is why, giving more in depth feed back and in addition what roles ones personality type they feel would be akin to

the problem you have here is that you are assuming that because you may have to communicate with various parties whilst with your DI that means you will get better at it..........problem is the handling period with your DI is towards the end of your training and it's a hell of a long way to go and a hell of a lot of money spent at that stage to find that your communication has NOT got any better.

the reason they stress the importance of communication and use it right from the beginning of the recruitment process is because communication is arguably the most important part of the role......it's also there as they want to train people to drive trains not train people to communicate!.....yes they have certain rules which they want you to abide by in terms of communication (phonetic alphabet etc) but it's pretty important that applicants are pretty damn good in relation to communication already.

rejection is always a pretty hard pill to swallow but don't let it lead you down the path of the old "it's if your face fits" line!...........yes your face should fit in terms of being right for the job and ticking all the boxes (they're spending thousands on you remember, it is their right) why should someone who's unreliable with poor sickness/disciplinary records get it over someone who's completely the opposite for example? but that codswallop about only getting it if your the manager's son's best mates nephew type of "if your face fits" is long gone!

even if you have had a one word answer in terms of feedback use it as a positive!.......look at the examples you are giving in terms of your communication, make sure you are replying to the questions they are asking properly, for example if they want to know about what YOU did in a certain task involving team work don't waffle on about what the group did that's not what they asked. Make sure you are keeping eye contact with the people interviewing you, try not to mumble, don't go off on tangents when answering questions......there are things you can certainly do to help yourself.

if you don't take their feedback on board and do something with it one word or 100 you are you're own worst enemy.....it's there to help.

 

[JamesTT]

Thank you for the feedback, a few points.
Firstly I believe that improvement in how to communicate can be taught. Communication skills are not something innate but very much a nurture attribute and not something one is born with in my opinion. Training should include advice on cutting unneccessary dialogue.
Surely the most important time a member of railway staff has to communicate regardless of who they are is making an emergency call. I fortunately have never had to make one but have never been criticised during a mock one with a trainer. My issue really was with feedback and how communication skills were cited as why I failed. I have been on main trains and the communication skills of train crew has been non existent. I also hear of drivers amusing passengers with quizzes and entertaining announcements. I would be interested if other candidates were failed for their communication skills and the feedback they received

 

[notadriver]

Does a 2nd MMI fail mean a ban for life ?

 

[CyrusWuff]

Does a 2nd MMI fail mean a ban for life ?

Or until the tests are redesigned again...assuming they "wipe the slate clean" like they did with the last big change.

 

[A-driver]

Thank you for the feedback, a few points.

Firstly I believe that improvement in how to communicate can be taught. Communication skills are not something innate but very much a nurture attribute and not something one is born with in my opinion. Training should include advice on cutting unneccessary dialogue.

Surely the most important time a member of railway staff has to communicate regardless of who they are is making an emergency call. I fortunately have never had to make one but have never been criticised during a mock one with a trainer. My issue really was with feedback and how communication skills were cited as why I failed. I have been on main trains and the communication skills of train crew has been non existent. I also hear of drivers amusing passengers with quizzes and entertaining announcements. I would be interested if other candidates were failed for their communication skills and the feedback they received

Whilst I don't disagree with you here, the thing you need to keep in mind is that a lot of people are chasing every single train driver job. Say 10 people including yourself were applying for 1 single job. 5 fail the paper sift. 2 fail earlier on in the assessments and 1 fails the first interview. Down to you and one other. You both have almost identical scores so far on the recruitment system. Comes down to the final interview. You are considered to be slightly lacking in communication skills. The other candidate is considered to excel in all elements of that interview including communication. Who will get the job?

I understand the main issue isn't that specific job but the fact you are now ruled out from the job for life but the industry is far keener to take on people who already have the required skill set and just train them up on job specifics rather than take someone who is almost there and risk them not getting the hang of something or have to spend time training them. It's largely down to the competition.

If I've read your earlier posts correctly you retook the interview fairly close to the first attempt. I'm not trying to make you feel down or say 'I wouldn't have done it like that' etc but the point of all the assessments is they judge where you are at with the required skills. Retaking them close together seems rather pointless considering you only get 2 attempts. If you are deemed not to have the required skills it's unlikely you will have developed them in a short space of time. You'd stand a greater chance of going off for a few years and actively developing those skills through other jobs etc rather than spending a few months deliberately trying to improve.

The best structured interviews are from people who havnt gone in with all the examples specifically prepared just to pass but are able to just recall times they have done something over the course of their life.

I'm also slightly concerned you state that you have been on trains where you accuse the staff of having non existant communication skills. I'd suggest you reconsider such a statement considering you are the one who has failed the interview for communication whilst they are the ones who have passed them! I'm not sure how you can state such a thing as you wouldn't really be able to judge safety critical communication skills as a passenger in any way. If you are basing it purely on the use of the PA then you need to bear in mind that, especially on DOO trains, making announcements is right down at the bottom of the priority list for any driver and you have no way of knowing what the drier was up to when not making announcements.

I don't think any of your posts have come across as 'sour grapes' but rather as understandable disappointment. But the I read that accusation and now it's certainly a case of sour grapes!

 

[TDK]

I went for a trainee driver's job last year and past all of the 'practical' parts of the assessment process. I then past a line manager interview and from the feedback was told by HR. I had impressed the managers and they were looking forward to working with me. Unfortunately I totally screwed up my MMI. I knew within the first few minutes I had messed up but soldiered on. I was not surprised to hear that I had failed, but was disappointed in the feedback. The feedback consisted of a one word answer 'communication'. Anyway 6 months later I retook the MMI, having passed a line manager interview with another depot. Sadly I failed that MMI as well. I did feel it went better and the feedback was I improved but still fell short on the communication aspect. I did get more detailed feedback, however the criticism was I over the elaborated answers.
Now I know that these are comments usually made by people who don't progress but some people have trotted out the following mantra.
'You only progress if your face fits'. I am aware that the driver assessments are basically a pyschological test of one's suitability to do the role. Having passed all tests and a DM interview I would have thought that my suitability was pretty much without question. Is it the case that actually the MMI is the real test? Also I fell down on the communication aspect. My question is surely during the training. Trainee drivers whilst under supervision of their DI etc. Will be in scenarios where they communicate with the following. Signaller, conductor, manager and other staff. Surely improving how one communicates with these people is part of the training? Is more the case that the MMI is the real test of if ones face fits, lets say from a psychological point of view? If this is the case would it not be fairer to say. Yes you have passed all these tests however we don't deem you suitable and this is why, giving more in depth feed back and in addition what roles ones personality type they feel would be akin to

Nothing to do with "if your face fits" it should read "no suitable for the role" If this is down to communication then that is your weakness! Communication is a huge part of the role from communication with your fellow colleagues, other railway staff, management, passengers, roster clerks, trainers, cleaners - you get the drift. If you are found to have poor communication skills then sorry, you are just not suitable for the job. It's not your fault just a quality you are lacking. I feel the system would be a lot fairer if the managers interview was the last hurdle and not the first, it always used to be the last part, this way if you pass the MMI and then fail the managers interview you still have one life intact.

Personality type does come into it to a certain degree, some personality types would not be suitable for the role and these are usually seen during the managers interview and not the MMI.

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

At the recruitment stage for train driving these days you are just another one of the faceless masses.

That is the reality of a way over applied for job.

Even sons and daughters of existing drivers have to pass all the tests to complete the never ending paper chain, and while their "face" may fit a little more than the faceless mass of the street, I've seen them fail the recruitment assessments.

Train driving communication at the end of the day comes down to lifting the idiot flap and pushing the big red button on the GSMR and saying : " This is an emergency call " in the midst of death, chaos and post event recrimination and investigation.

It's rare, thankfully, but that's down to professionalism and communication.

Safety critical communication, aligned with route knowledge are the most important factors for a driver in my opinion.

Sadly you failed, so do untold thousands of others. Being a driver is pretty crap anyway, it's great if you like to get up at 0200 every day for 3 weeks, then get to bed at 0200 for the next 3 weeks, go weeks without seeing your family and see your social, family and sex life dwindle to nothing and read the legions of deaths at 55 in the ASLEF magazine and accept that the job is slowly killing you.

If I could get you to drive my train for 90% of the time and have you give me 90% of the wages, I'd happily go out and do all the things I can't do because of work.

There are 1000's of other roles on the railway, without which the thing couldn't function, if you are really interested in becoming a railwayman, go for one of them. I know of many people who have been drivers and have been removed from the driving grade who are doing those other roles.

It's all part of life's rich tapestry, I wanted to be a commercial pilot, I have a private licence, I can fly like a bird, but my maths skills were never, ever going to be commensurate with becoming a commercial pilot

It happens to about 90% of the world's population !

Can you see how much better my post is communicated than yours, which I had much difficulty in reading.

 

[red2005]

Thank you for the feedback, a few points.
Firstly I believe that improvement in how to communicate can be taught. Communication skills are not something innate but very much a nurture attribute and not something one is born with in my opinion. Training should include advice on cutting unneccessary dialogue.
Surely the most important time a member of railway staff has to communicate regardless of who they are is making an emergency call. I fortunately have never had to make one but have never been criticised during a mock one with a trainer. My issue really was with feedback and how communication skills were cited as why I failed. I have been on main trains and the communication skills of train crew has been non existent. I also hear of drivers amusing passengers with quizzes and entertaining announcements. I would be interested if other candidates were failed for their communication skills and the feedback they received

Oh i agree they can teach you certain things like i said and you can certainly improve and toc's do this regularly as part of driver training, but the thing is they have a minimum standard which you have to reach BEFORE they are willing to do this. Why do you think ex emergency services staff are so popular within safety critical roles?

Like the chap above said.....you are probably just 1 of 10 plus applicants for every job so law of averages states that some of them are going to be more suited than you in some aspects of the recruitment and vice versa......but there lies the problem, whilst the other applicants are doing that there's one or two candidates that are excelling in everything and are more suited to the job given what they have shown and that is noticed!.......remember these recruiters ain't just HR guys they are really well trained and know exactly what they are looking for and will only ever give it to those they see as the best. In fact I am pretty sure they'd go as far as cancelling the recruitment drive all together than give it to unsuitable candidates

That's a bit of a low blow and a bit inaccurate if you ask me personally!.....yes there are probably some old hands who are set in their ways in terms of communicating to passengers but 30 years of dealing with the public probably sends you that way!.....i did 7 as a guard and felt like i was really starting to dislike people given the way i was treated by the public at times and that really wasn't me so did something about it!.......very few customer facing staff are the same quirky,smiley individuals they were when they joined the job 30 years ago......however my safety critical communication has always been top notch because it has to be and i bet the same goes for the people who you were claiming had poor communication skills.

Yes the laugh and a joke,quirky announcement thing i love and so do the passengers (most of the time) you gotta remember the railway environment can be a really negative environment at times with everyone just trying to get somewhere and not actually give a flying hoop about anyone else whether that be staff or fellow passengers........announcements like this just show passengers that not all railway staff are ogre's/robots.......and believe it or not the ability to put humour into announcements in a way where it can calm people down or make a nasty situation that bit better is all part of an extremely important skill set.

Remember these are guys who have probably been using communication in their jobs for donkeys now......you have failed 2 MMI's on communication......don't question them buddy......if it was me I'd be picking their brains to see what advice they can give me.

 

[JamesTT]

Once again thank you all for the further input. A few points if I may. Firstly as it is part of the assessment surely the MMI is a pass or fail and it doesnt matter how many people are taking it. Next how many of you that are now drivers get asked questions that are equivalent of interview questions in your day to day job? Also if one has proven themselves in a railway career in terms of communicating by speaking to control, signaller, various members of staff and making announcements and they have taken onboard criticism and improved does this count for nothing?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Further to my previous comment. I would just like to point out that some other threads regards the MMI people have been told they failed because the examples they gave didnt have enough detail. That they were not meaty enough for want of a better phrase

 

[A-driver]

Once again thank you all for the further input. A few points if I may. Firstly as it is part of the assessment surely the MMI is a pass or fail and it doesnt matter how many people are taking it. Next how many of you that are now drivers get asked questions that are equivalent of interview questions in your day to day job? Also if one has proven themselves in a railway career in terms of communicating by speaking to control, signaller, various members of staff and making announcements and they have taken onboard criticism and improved does this count for nothing?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Further to my previous comment. I would just like to point out that some other threads regards the MMI people have been told they failed because the examples they gave didnt have enough detail. That they were not meaty enough for want of a better phrase

All the psychometric a are marked in comparison to the other candidates so it's not always a straight pass/fail but does in some ways go down to how well others have also performed.

 

[ungreat]

At the recruitment stage for train driving these days you are just another one of the faceless masses.

That is the reality of a way over applied for job.

Even sons and daughters of existing drivers have to pass all the tests to complete the never ending paper chain, and while their "face" may fit a little more than the faceless mass of the street, I've seen them fail the recruitment assessments.

Train driving communication at the end of the day comes down to lifting the idiot flap and pushing the big red button on the GSMR and saying : " This is an emergency call " in the midst of death, chaos and post event recrimination and investigation.

It's rare, thankfully, but that's down to professionalism and communication.

Safety critical communication, aligned with route knowledge are the most important factors for a driver in my opinion.

Sadly you failed, so do untold thousands of others. Being a driver is pretty crap anyway, it's great if you like to get up at 0200 every day for 3 weeks, then get to bed at 0200 for the next 3 weeks, go weeks without seeing your family and see your social, family and sex life dwindle to nothing and read the legions of deaths at 55 in the ASLEF magazine and accept that the job is slowly killing you.

If I could get you to drive my train for 90% of the time and have you give me 90% of the wages, I'd happily go out and do all the things I can't do because of work.

There are 1000's of other roles on the railway, without which the thing couldn't function, if you are really interested in becoming a railwayman, go for one of them. I know of many people who have been drivers and have been removed from the driving grade who are doing those other roles.

It's all part of life's rich tapestry, I wanted to be a commercial pilot, I have a private licence, I can fly like a bird, but my maths skills were never, ever going to be commensurate with becoming a commercial pilot

It happens to about 90% of the world's population !

Can you see how much better my post is communicated than yours, which I had much difficulty in reading.

This made my day,and its only 8am! Cheers brother!!

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

Once again thank you all for the further input. A few points if I may.

I HAVE BROKEN YOUR POST DOWN INTO BULLET POINTS AS THE QUOTE JUST CAME UP AS A LUMP : JAMES' INITIAL POST BELOW

Firstly as it is part of the assessment surely the MMI is a pass or fail and it doesnt matter how many people are taking it.

Next how many of you that are now drivers get asked questions that are equivalent of interview questions in your day to day job? Also if one has proven themselves in a railway career in terms of communicating by speaking to control, signaller, various members of staff and making announcements and they have taken onboard criticism and improved does this count for nothing?


Further to my previous comment. I would just like to point out that some other threads regards the MMI people have been told they failed because the examples they gave didnt have enough detail. That they were not meaty enough for want of a better phrase.

MY REPLY TO JAMES

It is a very long time since my interview, it was with a service delivery manager and someone from Personnel ! ( I hate that change, how much I'd rather things be personal than to be considered as just another "resource" )

They asked me to give an example of when I had worked alone, and when I'd been in a difficult situation and how I'd reacted and how I had followed and applied rules.

I said : "I can give you examples if you wish, but I did spent 3 years in the Royal Corps of Signals" and they basically said : "oh that's fine then, we won't need to teach you the phonetic alphabet "

I have been in dodgy railway situations, have to follow railway rules every day, have to be precise and concise in my safety critical comms every day and have worked alone many times - and many times with other staff where the possibilities of miscommunication expand exponentially.

So in that respect I guess whilst I do not get asked direct questions of that nature, I do follow those questions asked in interview every day I work.

As for previous railway experience, people who have been guards and on the railway since Brunel was a tea boy STILL have to sit an initial telephone interview with someone from HR if they apply for a trainee driver job

And they fail, sometimes, as the result of a faceless communication down a telephone with someone straight from school or university who has never done a day's operational work on the railway, how do you think that makes them feel ?

 

[red2005]

Once again thank you all for the further input. A few points if I may. Firstly as it is part of the assessment surely the MMI is a pass or fail and it doesnt matter how many people are taking it. Next how many of you that are now drivers get asked questions that are equivalent of interview questions in your day to day job? Also if one has proven themselves in a railway career in terms of communicating by speaking to control, signaller, various members of staff and making announcements and they have taken onboard criticism and improved does this count for nothing?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Further to my previous comment. I would just like to point out that some other threads regards the MMI people have been told they failed because the examples they gave didnt have enough detail. That they were not meaty enough for want of a better phrase

Yes it is very much pass or fail but you still have to reach the standard, some will be stronger than others and a decision by HR still has to be made in terms of who the job goes to.......they don't create extra positions for people who have all performed well....if there's 2 jobs for example there's 2 jobs.......how they do that really isn't anything to do with us.

Proving yourself on the railway has very little bearing on the recruitment days........I've known guards and other staff with exemplary records in relation to safety/sickness/reliability constantly fail recruitment events/ days.....It really is how you perform on the day. So in answer to your question it counts for nothing and rightly so if you ask me.....if i went to a recruitment day I'd like knowing that we are all starting on a level playing field.....if someone communicates daily but can't hack a recruitment day that unfortunately is their problem! (ruthless i know but like i say it's a competition)

Yes your examples do have to be detailed....remember this is how members of HR who may be meeting you for the first time get a real grip on who you are, what you are about and whether you are suitable!......this is an area for example where so many people can't think of decent examples for the questions asked and rather than be honest.....lie.....and get caught out so their integrity is instantly an issue. It is an extremely important part of the process and remember their decision could be putting someone in charge of a train with hundreds of people on it.......would you like to be making that decision? i wouldn't.

 

[JamesTT]

All the psychometric a are marked in comparison to the other candidates so it's not always a straight pass/fail but does in some ways go down to how well others have also performed.

Interesting so the pass mark for some candidates could have been lower than the mark I failed with
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'm also slightly concerned you state that you have been on trains where you accuse the staff of having non existant communication skills. I'd suggest you reconsider such a statement considering you are the one who has failed the interview for communication whilst they are the ones who have passed them! I'm not sure how you can state such a thing as you wouldn't really be able to judge safety critical communication skills as a passenger in any way. If you are basing it purely on the use of the PA then you need to bear in mind that, especially on DOO trains, making announcements is right down at the bottom of the priority list for any driver and you have no way of knowing what the drier was up to when not making announcements.

I don't think any of your posts have come across as 'sour grapes' but rather as understandable disappointment. But the I read that accusation and now it's certainly a case of sour grapes![/QUOTE]

Fair point and sorry if it came across like that. If my downfall was lack of brevity would this not suggest those who pass have the skills to make a quick and concise announcement. For example when sat at a signal to allow a fast train to go by?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

At the recruitment stage for train driving these days you are just another one of the faceless masses.

That is the reality of a way over applied for job.

Even sons and daughters of existing drivers have to pass all the tests to complete the never ending paper chain, and while their "face" may fit a little more than the faceless mass of the street, I've seen them fail the recruitment assessments.

Train driving communication at the end of the day comes down to lifting the idiot flap and pushing the big red button on the GSMR and saying : " This is an emergency call " in the midst of death, chaos and post event recrimination and investigation.

It's rare, thankfully, but that's down to professionalism and communication.

Safety critical communication, aligned with route knowledge are the most important factors for a driver in my opinion.

Sadly you failed, so do untold thousands of others. Being a driver is pretty crap anyway, it's great if you like to get up at 0200 every day for 3 weeks, then get to bed at 0200 for the next 3 weeks, go weeks without seeing your family and see your social, family and sex life dwindle to nothing and read the legions of deaths at 55 in the ASLEF magazine and accept that the job is slowly killing you.

If I could get you to drive my train for 90% of the time and have you give me 90% of the wages, I'd happily go out and do all the things I can't do because of work.

There are 1000's of other roles on the railway, without which the thing couldn't function, if you are really interested in becoming a railwayman, go for one of them. I know of many people who have been drivers and have been removed from the driving grade who are doing those other roles.

It's all part of life's rich tapestry, I wanted to be a commercial pilot, I have a private licence, I can fly like a bird, but my maths skills were never, ever going to be commensurate with becoming a commercial pilot

It happens to about 90% of the world's population !

Can you see how much better my post is communicated than yours, which I had much difficulty in reading.

Thank you and sorry you were unable to understand my post.

I am sure you got the gist of it though. It was galling to have been basically offered a trainee driver position at 2 different depots and falling at the last stage. In someways it would have been easier to deal with failing the group bourdon.

OK maybe there is an element of envy from other posts I saw written by other people who failed their first MMI, and that the feedback they received was comprehensive compared to the one word I got.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As I have said it is frustrating to have passed the majority of the assessment, then 2 interviews with separate driver managers, to then fail the MMI twice.

Also I was encouraged by HR to take the resit as soon as I could

 

[ComUtoR]

Fair point and sorry if it came across like that. If my downfall was lack of brevity would this not suggest those who pass have the skills to make a quick and concise announcement. For example when sat at a signal to allow a fast train to go by?

Being a Train Driver is so much more than sitting on a signal and making an announcement. A few weeks ago I sat through an 8 hour assessment !

Communication on the railways is essential. I need to be able to communicate with every member of staff that interacts with me. I fill out numerous forms and send many many emails to various departments.

It is also important to remember than the Rules course is quite intensive and you are also being assessed on your "trainability" From the very first day I was acutely aware of the importance of communication.

Maybe the best advice for the future posters will be to take a course in communication as it is clearly a skill that is required for entry to the grade.

 

[JamesTT]

Being a Train Driver is so much more than sitting on a signal and making an announcement. A few weeks ago I sat through an 8 hour assessment !

Communication on the railways is essential. I need to be able to communicate with every member of staff that interacts with me. I fill out numerous forms and send many many emails to various departments.

It is also important to remember than the Rules course is quite intensive and you are also being assessed on your "trainability" From the very first day I was acutely aware of the importance of communication.

Maybe the best advice for the future posters will be to take a course in communication as it is clearly a skill that is required for entry to the grade.

I too communicate with members of staff, I also fill out various forms and send emails.

The assessor didnt say that my ability to be trained was in question.

I have not seen any other posts relating to the MMI citing communication skills as the reason for failure
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I am not so ignorant as to think driving a train is just about sitting at a signal making announcements.

I was just commenting that if drivers are chosen for their customer service skills and ability to communicate concisely, amongst other attributes. That making an announcement after a train has been waiting 5 minutes, would be something expected (Yes I am aware if safe to do)

 

[ComUtoR]

The assessor didn't say that my ability to be trained was in question.

It is being assessed. Whether you are being directly told or not. It is one of the reasons why there is such an in depth recruitment process and assessments.

I have not seen any other posts relating to the MMI citing communication skills as the reason for failure

They failed for their reasons, you failed for yours. Everyone is different and not everyone posts about their reasons for failure. This is a very small reflection of the number of people who take the assessment.

I am not so ignorant as to think driving a train is just about sitting at a signal making announcements.

And neither am I making that assumption. However; there are many posters and readers alike who will complain about not passing and how the assessments are in no way a reflection on what happens on a day to day basis driving a train. I think people forget there is sooooo much more than driving. They also forget that the assessment is for suitability, trainability, and aptitude.

I was just commenting that if drivers are chosen for their customer service skills and ability to communicate concisely, amongst other attributes. That making an announcement after a train has been waiting 5 minutes, would be something expected (Yes I am aware if safe to do)

Absolutely expected but it is probably the least significant. More so now that we have automated announcements. I can press 4 buttons and the train will announce "sorry for the delay, this is due to x"

 

[JamesTT]

Thank you for the feedback.

It is being assessed. Whether you are being directly told or not. It is one of the reasons why there is such an in depth recruitment process and assessments.

Doesn't the suitability for training part of the assessment and the question relating to a training course in the MMI and similar questions in the DMI assess for this?


They failed for their reasons, you failed for yours. Everyone is different and not everyone posts about their reasons for failure. This is a very small reflection of the number of people who take the assessment.

Ok that is fair enough. As I have said the galling thing is to get that far and be told I failed basically because I gave too much info in my answers. I don't think I waffled all the information was relevant to the examples I gave and I didnt go off on a tangent.


And neither am I making that assumption. However; there are many posters and readers alike who will complain about not passing and how the assessments are in no way a reflection on what happens on a day to day basis driving a train. I think people forget there is sooooo much more than driving. They also forget that the assessment is for suitability, trainability, and aptitude.

I know there is more to the job. Obviously I would say this, but I am confident that I would have been able to complete the training both theory and practical, then go on to deal with all aspects of the role. As said I passed 2 DMI's. One was particularly impressed with my performance in the interview



Absolutely expected but it is probably the least significant. More so now that we have automated announcements. I can press 4 buttons and the train will announce "sorry for the delay, this is due to x"

Impressive stuff even more annoying to know because I would have utilised such tools when able to do so if I had been successful. Also I have communicated with, managers, control, signaller, fleet, trainers, acted as a mentor to a number of staff. Successfully passed all rules assessments with no concerns raised.

 

[ComUtoR]

Doesn't the suitability for training part of the assessment and the question relating to a training course in the MMI and similar questions in the DMI assess for this?

You need to take the assessments as a whole rather than taking a single element. It is frustrating but you really do need to pass everything. I don't specifically agree with this; as potentially someone may fall short on one aspect but be very strong on others. This is applicable to all employment where there is a recruitment criteria.

Ok that is fair enough. As I have said the galling thing is to get that far and be told I failed basically because I gave too much info in my answers. I don't think I waffled all the information was relevant to the examples I gave and I didnt go off on a tangent.

It is a matter of perspective. I still remember mine and I thought I had failed but I was successful. The MMI and DMI is the most subjective part of the process. Whilst that is no comfort it is still the interviewers decision that is final. I suppose that is one of the reasons why two attempts are allowed.

I know there is more to the job. Obviously I would say this, but I am confident that I would have been able to complete the training both theory and practical, then go on to deal with all aspects of the role. As said I passed 2 DMI's. One was particularly impressed with my performance in the interview

It doesn't matter what you or I believe. The criteria for all parts to be passed is for every applicant. It has been discussed before that it may be that some who fail would still make the grade. There has to be a line drawn somewhere and those who implement the assessments need to be certain that they put forward the right people. Those people are the ones who pass every stage. Even if there was another pool where those who "just missed" or it was on a sliding scale then only those who pass every stage will go on to the next step. You would still be pushed down the list and that benefit no-one.

Also I have communicated with, managers, control, signaller, fleet, trainers, acted as a mentor to a number of staff. Successfully passed all rules assessments with no concerns raised.

I'm confused and may have read that wrong. You are a Driver ? you have passed the rules exam ? You already communicate with the Signaller ?

 

[notadriver]

Why does everyone think they can be a train driver ? Does it really look *that* easy ?

 

[ComUtoR]

Why does everyone think they can be a train driver ? Does it really look *that* easy ?

Yes.

The number of conversations I've had with friends and family is staggering. Even my kids think its easy and they have been up the front ! (not when driving obviously)

 

[Fred Dinenage]

I think it's more JamesTT can't accept he isn't going to get another chance at being a driver, rather than everyone thinks they can. Nothing like a sweeping statement, is there?

James, i failed the old style CBI as my lone working example was poor. I addressed that by asking for lone working in my present employment and was able to use that when i sat the MMI ( the old style tests had been discontinued by then).

How did you address your first failure? Did you make changes in your approach for the second?

 

[JamesTT]

Of course I dont think the job is easy.
I mentioned communicating with railway staff, because others mentioned doing so.
I know that I didnt pass all sections of the assessment so overall I failed. Do the parts I was successful in not display an aptitude for the role?

My feedback from first attempt was one word. When I asked for more feedback the one word was repeated.

Of course I changed my approach on the second attempt.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
My issue really is around consistency, if the assessments are based on RSSB/OPC rules then the feedback given should be consistent across all TOCs and external assessment centres.

That had I been told after the first attempt that my answers needed to be more concise and that they had lacked brevity, I would have stood a better chance.

I have seen posts where the individual was told they failed on one question and why. So all they needed to do was repeat the same answers 6 months later just changing one. (I am aware that is oversimplifying it)

In relation to communicating with railway staff I work on the railway but not as a driver
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Apologies another point, if the MMI is so important, explain the following.

I am aware of a TOC that mistakenly offered someone a trainee driver role before taking the MMI. The individual sat a MMI and failed it, however because they had received the job offer, got lawyers and union involved. The said individual is now in training to become a driver, having not passed the MMI
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think it's more JamesTT can't accept he isn't going to get another chance at being a driver, rather than everyone thinks they can. Nothing like a sweeping statement, is there?

Yes I can accept it what choice do I have? Claim mitigating circumstances for the way I messed up the first attempt

James, i failed the old style CBI as my lone working example was poor. I addressed that by asking for lone working in my present employment and was able to use that when i sat the MMI ( the old style tests had been discontinued by then).

Exactly Fred you were told your lone working example specifically was poor and was able to address this. I had a ONE word answer. Not that I spoke too quickly, came across as nervous, said too much, or too little, or didn't stick to the subject. Or was poor at maintaining eye contact, that I my delivery was dull and boring

 

[Dave999]

When I had my MMI I asked what feedback I would get if I failed and was told that they can't provide specific information but would give a reason for failure (which sections failed). Communication covers listening, assertiveness, clarity and information sharing.