I was waiting for that comment, mental work is also physically tiring.
They will get what they pay for.
The main aim of a union is to get the best deal for their members, so if their members want to maximise days off by packing in the hours into as few days as possible, that is what they will try to get. I do not have a problem with that, but I do think the RMT should be called out when they erroneously cite 'safety' as their priority. The RMT do have a reputation for being economical with the truth, to put it mildly.
I don't know about the staffing levels but EMT only really dispatch the 22x/HST services. The 170 services seam to be self dispatch.
This is especially true if working nights, the RAIB have changed their views on this.
I don’t think they’ve ever shouted about “safety” in a dispute over 12 hour rosters? If they did, locally, in that example at Stirling then I stand corrected. The risk from returning from a period of rest days must be offset by the better work/life balance and increased rest periods, less time spent travelling to/from work, fewer (if any) short turnarounds to try and fit more, shorter, shifts into the roster. I’ve worked plenty of 12 hour shifts (but on an 8 hour roster) and never felt that safety had been compromised as a result. I’d have preferred a 12 hour roster, and I’d have felt much more thoroughly rested overall if I’d had one.
The news story I linked to has the statement (not attributed to Bob Crow, unlike other RMT statements in the article)
That was where my suggestion that the RMT had said it was about safety came from, if that’s incorrect then I’m happy to accept the correction“BBC Article” said:
A 4 or 5 day week working shifts, especially with Sundays outside the working week but with a contractual requirement to work them, isn’t the “best balance” in my experience. It means much less quality family time, especially at weekends, in turn leading to more stress and the consequences of that. I feel much more relaxed, and well rested, now that I’m on a proper 4 day week (with longer days), and the long (five day) weekends are invaluable for that quality time at home. Unfortunately it’s largely either 8s or 12s in the signalling grade, and I don’t really see the problem with the latter with proper breaks and/or with a relatively light workload.
Agreed. It's all very well for people who don't work shifts to comment on what they think makes it safer and better, but I always say that they should try working shifts themselves and see what it takes out of you; it isn't just what time you get up and how much sleep you get but also thinking about what's going on at home when you're not there, and anything else you've got going on in life. One might think staff on late turns are well rested and not fatigued, but what if they've been up since 6am because they had to do school duties at home. Similarly, working 7 night turns in a row people always assume towards the end of the week you'd be really tired and worn out; but the reality is the opposite and I'm always most tired at the start of the week!
There is some RSSB guidance about the first night shift. (https://www.rssb.co.uk/FatigueConte...ntrol-options-first-night-shifts-guidance.pdf) The first night is always the hardest :/ Your body needs time to adapt so by the end of your week you have flipped your body clock over and adapted. With a short burst; your screwed. The loss of the long weekend also means your recovery time is broken and again, you can't adjust as quick. With fatigue, you also have to consider the swap in shift. I hate when my bodyclock is on the wrong shift
We used to have 6 nights and then long weekend. Because it was rostered as a set of 6 you didn't get nights as much as its just a single week. Due to 'fatigue' rules this was changed to a split week of nights. Now you get an increased chance to get nights and your night week is split with a 'normal' shift and you get less time to recover. I don't know a single Driver who prefers our current system.
From what I gather (only from what I've.read, so don't take it to be 100% correct), TPE have been able to self-dispatch at York. Because the risk assessment found causes for concern with this, they (sensibly) appointed Departing Train Monitors. Considering the number of trains already needing dispatchers at York, and some double units like double Voyagers needing 2 dispatchers to dispatch one service, I imagine LNER's resources were too stretched to provide additional staff, hence TPE are using their own staff.
I'd always imagined it was to do with franchise agreements, i.e. it could be part of Virgin Trains' franchise agreement that they, as principal operators and station managers dispatch Arriva Trains Wales services at Stockport, and in return, Arriva will pay Virgin a set fee. *Hypothetical examples, of course.
