What is causing driver shortages?

[Sorcerer]

When wanting to plan on riding a new refurbished Pendolino, I had to bear in mind the reduced timetable when considering when to get a ticket. However curiosity prompted me to try and find out why there is a reduced timetable to begin with, and according to Avanti West Coast themselves they say it is due to current industrial relations resulting in staff shortages as well as the majority of drivers making themselves unavailable for overtime in a properly co-ordinated fashion and at short notice. However according to this article on MyLondon (I am unsure of any biases so taken with a grain of salt):

Speaking before Saturday's strike (13 August), the head of the train union said: "They are lying. Avanti does not employ enough drivers to run the services they have promised to run. There is no unofficial action. We’re on strike on 13 August. They are a cheapskate company that will not train enough drivers and rely on rest day working. The company is selling its customers short.

This therefore had me thinking, based on both this situation and the current trend of industrial action across the network, are driver shortages a nationwide problem, and if so, what could be done about it?

Considering that earlier in the year Avanti planned to recruit 40 new drivers this year, it seems odd that I haven't seen such positions be advertised on their site. Granted they could've all been meant to be internal applicants but it seems odd to make a deal about new recruitments with such an exclusive pool of candidates. Of course I could've also just missed every job opening.

So I suppose the question here is: are there actual driver shortages on the network which puts more overtime pressures on existing staff, or is there a bit more to it than that? How likely is this also going to affect future recruitment for aspiring drivers (of which there is no shortage on these forums) based on any possible shortages?

 

[ComUtoR]

This therefore had me thinking, based on both this situation and the current trend of industrial action across the network, are driver shortages a nationwide problem, and if so, what could be done about it?

Pay them better
Increase staffing levels to the correct levels
Stop relying on overtime

So I suppose the question here is: are there actual driver shortages on the network which puts more overtime pressures on existing staff, or is there a bit more to it than that?

Yes there are genuine shortages. Yes there is a bit more to it. The bit more to it is how the railway is run (generally on the cheap and to the bone)

How likely is this also going to affect future recruitment for aspiring drivers (of which there is no shortage on these forums) based on any possible shortages?

The failure rate for applicants is shockingly high. There is no shortage of applicants. Then you have the usual training issues.

 

[Emma2021]

Considering that earlier in the year Avanti planned to recruit 40 new drivers this year, it seems odd that I haven't seen such positions be advertised on their site. Granted they could've all been meant to be internal applicants but it seems odd to make a deal about new recruitments with such an exclusive pool of candidates. Of course I could've also just missed every job opening.

They were advertising for trainee train drivers externally back in january. Obviously it isn't a quick process to recruit due to all the tests and stages in the application process. Then still takes time after that to train those who pass the application

 

[Sorcerer]

Pay them better
Increase staffing levels to the correct levels
Stop relying on overtime

I must admit that I genuinely did not know just how much the railways relied on overtime even for drivers who are heavily unionised. For Avanti specifically I would've expected better because of how I'd always heard about Virgin having a high quality of work, though I had also heard that in it's later years it did seem to be becoming more like Stagecoach. After all, had they been part of the winning bid it would've certainly been Virgin in name only.

Yes there are genuine shortages. Yes there is a bit more to it. The bit more to it is how the railway is run (generally on the cheap and to the bone)

I can't imagine the pandemic and fallen passengers numbers have made this any better.

They were advertising for trainee train drivers externally back in january. Obviously it isn't a quick process to recruit due to all the tests and stages in the application process. Then still takes time after that to train those who pass the application

I imagine given the 18 month training this was in part down to the introduction of new stock and increased Liverpool services that would align with a December 2023 timetable change after the training is complete. I suppose it's just a matter of waiting for anyone who is aspiring now though, especially with current shortages and industrial relations demanding more working staff.

 

[NorthernTech]

I work/did work in a different sector until this week . The company I work/worked for are a large company who basically run it’s front line staff the same way and then have a constant scheme in place for some kind of overtime bonus offer to fill the rest of the hours or they have contractors to do the easy stuff (badly usually). I presume this is cheaper than more staff due to holidays, pension, etc. Big company, shareholders to keep happy with dividends, Senior Leadership(t) team to keep in high salary/bonuses….

 

[CAF397]

Reliance on overtime to cover work saves the company many £££s per year. Less NI and pension contributions for a start. The unions are correct when they say it is the companies who have wanted RDW, the unions would prefer 100% employment.

It is coming home to roost now most employees are no longer working overtime. This has been a long time coming.

 

[Sorcerer]

Are railway works contractually obliged to work overtime or is it largely voluntary? Or does it depend on the sector? What about drivers since we're talking about them specifically and how the shortages on the network relate to them not working overtime?

 

[ExRes]

The unions are correct when they say it is the companies who have wanted RDW, the unions would prefer 100% employment.

But why do ASLEF keep signing the RDW agreements? this has been going on for a ridiculous number of years with ASLEF continually saying how disgraceful the vacancy situation is while signing up for another year of RDW, if they truly wanted an end to this farce then they could have simply said no years ago and stuck to it

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

But why do ASLEF keep signing the RDW agreements? this has been going on for a ridiculous number of years with ASLEF continually saying how disgraceful the vacancy situation is while signing up for another year of RDW, if they truly wanted an end to this farce then they could have simply said no years ago and stuck to it

Everyone has their price…

 

[Randomer]

Reliance on overtime to cover work saves the company many £££s per year. Less NI and pension contributions for a start. The unions are correct when they say it is the companies who have wanted RDW, the unions would prefer 100% employment.

It is coming home to roost now most employees are no longer working overtime. This has been a long time coming.

Not only a problem on the railways at the moment but the long training time from recruitment to productive work makes it a much harder one to solve.

In my industry, which already has a long hours culture, the willingness to work rest days and overtime generally has gone down significantly post COVID. Running at 60% staffing with a reliance on expensive contractors is then causing workload issues for the remaining staff meaning they don't want to do the overtime and look at the contractors saying "I could just go and do that".

I can see this translating over to Avanti e.g. if you are being sent on a long job every spare turn do you then want to use your day off driving as well?

Everyone has their price…

At some point I'm not sure Avanti does. At least not a level they could sensibly afford i.e. the price of rest day working exceeding the contractual penalties and delay repay costs wouldn't be sensible. Although fairly academic when somebody else is holding the purse strings.

 

[TEW]

Are railway works contractually obliged to work overtime or is it largely voluntary? Or does it depend on the sector? What about drivers since we're talking about them specifically and how the shortages on the network relate to them not working overtime?

Train crew generally are contractually obliged to work a certain amount of overtime on days they are already scheduled to work but working on rest days is voluntary. Sundays are a bit more complicated as at some TOCs it is still overtime, but there might be an obligation to work some of them.

 

[ComUtoR]

But why do ASLEF keep signing the RDW agreements? this has been going on for a ridiculous number of years with ASLEF continually saying how disgraceful the vacancy situation is while signing up for another year of RDW, if they truly wanted an end to this farce then they could have simply said no years ago and stuck to it

Are you in the industry ?

I think you need to read one to understand why.

 

[ExRes]

Are you in the industry ?

I think you need to read one to understand why.

Not any longer but I was a driver and ASLEF member for over twenty years, every single RDW agreement signed was a get out of jail free card for the TOCs as they could sit back and keep their recruitment as low as possible, they could also cancel trains to their hearts content and pass the public buck to nasty selfish drivers not willing to work overtime, as for reading one when did that make any difference? we as drivers were never asked what we thought just told that an agreement had been signed, what's to understand?

 

[ComUtoR]

as for reading one when did that make any difference? we as drivers were never asked what we thought just told that an agreement had been signed, what's to understand?

And that is a major issue with ASLEF hopefully just your local branch.

I also thought as you do until I finally understood their main purpose.

1) The Union has zero power to control rest days. The only person who can decide if I work a rest day is me. Both the union and the company know this. Without an "agreement" the Union has no power (or the illusion of it).

2) The purpose of the Union is to look after it's members. By having an "agreement" means that the rest days are allocated by some kind of fair process. Without it, rest days tend to go to favourites and gets cherry picked. It also gives visibility and accountability. Our rest day counts are posted regularly. Before we had an agreement, that never existed.

3) It makes industrial action easier. I've noticed that ASLEF at some TOCs will remove the rest day agreement. All of a sudden, nobody is working a rest day. This is where the Union has some strength. It's is understood by the members that no agreement, means no rest days worked. This doesn't happen at my TOC as our ASLEF is rather notorious.

4) Your covered if you have an incident. My branch would never protect you if you had an incident on a rest day. This was one of those ancient and Victorian practices that has thankfully died out. In part, due to having a test day agreement.

I used to think they were bad and still don't believe the Union is doing the right thing by constantly "agreeing" to these agreements that often benefit the company as it does send a mixed message. These strikes are almost worthless.

A full rest day ban would destroy my TOC overnight but ASLEF know people always end up working them.

So yes, the content of the agreement is very important.

 

[Watershed]

But why do ASLEF keep signing the RDW agreements? this has been going on for a ridiculous number of years with ASLEF continually saying how disgraceful the vacancy situation is while signing up for another year of RDW, if they truly wanted an end to this farce then they could have simply said no years ago and stuck to it

To be fair to them, they have put their foot down at some TOCs and said that they won't sign another RDW agreement until the company agrees to recruit enough drivers for RDW to be unnecessary (in theory).

But there is a lot more to it than that, including internal politics on all sides.

 

[DanNCL]

I think it's pretty clear that there has been far too much of a reliance on overtime for many years, and now that people aren't working much overtime it's coming back to bite the companies on the backside. Quite simply, they've failed to employ enough drivers. No doubt the DFT are a large part of the problem but some of the blame will lie with the TOCs themselves.

Are railway works contractually obliged to work overtime or is it largely voluntary? Or does it depend on the sector? What about drivers since we're talking about them specifically and how the shortages on the network relate to them not working overtime?

I wouldn't be overtime if it was compulsory!

 

[Orange08]

I work/did work in a different sector until this week . The company I work/worked for are a large company who basically run it’s front line staff the same way and then have a constant scheme in place for some kind of overtime bonus offer to fill the rest of the hours or they have contractors to do the easy stuff (badly usually). I presume this is cheaper than more staff due to holidays, pension, etc. Big company, shareholders to keep happy with dividends, Senior Leadership(t) team to keep in high salary/bonuses….

Haha this sounds very much like the place I work at. You don’t drive a blue van do you….

 

[Goldfish62]

Reliance on overtime to cover work saves the company many £££s per year. Less NI and pension contributions for a start. The unions are correct when they say it is the companies who have wanted RDW, the unions would prefer 100% employment.

It is coming home to roost now most employees are no longer working overtime. This has been a long time coming.

And the blame falls squarely at the industry's feet. What the h*ll have the companies been doing over the past 25 years since the demise of BR?! (That's pretty much a rhetorical question, by the way)

 

[Watershed]

And the blame falls squarely at the industry's feet. What the h*ll have the companies been doing over the past 25 years since the demise of BR?! (That's pretty much a rhetorical question, by the way)

Pretty much the same as BR did for all its existence. The biggest difference is that whereas drivers were quite poorly paid in BR days, and thus overtime was essentially necessary to earn any sort of reasonable wage, pay deals over the years have brought salaries up to the extent that most drivers can do just fine without overtime. Therefore withdrawing RDW is easier for the unions to use as a negotiating tool now than in the past.

 

[43066]

Not any longer but I was a driver and ASLEF member for over twenty years, every single RDW agreement signed was a get out of jail free card for the TOCs as they could sit back and keep their recruitment as low as possible, they could also cancel trains to their hearts content and pass the public buck to nasty selfish drivers not willing to work overtime, as for reading one when did that make any difference? we as drivers were never asked what we thought just told that an agreement had been signed, what's to understand?

Thing is this is done at the request of the TOCs, so it’s a little unfair to blame ASLEF for agreeing. ASLEF are damned either way because if they refused to sanction it there would be the usual “lazy train drivers refuse to work overtime” complaints, just look at what happens when this happens even absent union action (see Avanti currently).

I wouldn't be overtime if it was compulsory!

I suppose committed Sundays (ie you work it if you can’t find cover and it’s on top of your normal four day week) is arguably a form of compulsory overtime. Also working weeks are worked out on an average number of hours so there will be weeks where a few hours of “compulsory overtime” naturally occurs as a result of working normal shifts.

Pretty much the same as BR did for all its existence. The biggest difference is that whereas drivers were quite poorly paid in BR days, and thus overtime was essentially necessary to earn any sort of reasonable wage, pay deals over the years have brought salaries up to the extent that most drivers can do just fine without overtime. Therefore withdrawing RDW is easier for the unions to use as a negotiating tool now than in the past.

Albeit as people earn more their expenses tend to increase. I’d be interested to know what % worked it due to BR versus now. Not all do it by any means but I’d say 50% plus do at least some, with some doing quite incredible amounts of it.

Ultimately everyone (hopefully!) understands that it’s not something any are entitled to and there can be no complaint if it disappears. Some likely would be in difficulty if it was withdrawn, but ultimately we all know that full employment is in the ASLEF charter…

 

[Goldfish62]

Pretty much the same as BR did for all its existence. The biggest difference is that whereas drivers were quite poorly paid in BR days, and thus overtime was essentially necessary to earn any sort of reasonable wage, pay deals over the years have brought salaries up to the extent that most drivers can do just fine without overtime. Therefore withdrawing RDW is easier for the unions to use as a negotiating tool now than in the past.

But in the time of BR Sundays were very different. Shops closed and largely a "day of rest". My own local train service on Sundays was hourly, four coaches. Now it's half hourly and 10 coaches.

I'm sure if BR had still been around it would have tackled the issue, just as some of the better run TOCs did so soon after privatisation. If you look at the changes to work practices and agreements that BR managed to get through from the early 80s onwards it doesn't bear comparison with what the majority of TOCs have (not) done since.

 

[skyhigh]

I wouldn't be overtime if it was compulsory!

Based on my contract if I'm booked as spare on the link my day can be extended by up to 2hrs to allocate me an uncovered diagram. I can't say no and the extra time is paid on top of my base wage, so that's an example of compulsory overtime. Same as committed Sundays.

 

[Watershed]

But in the time of BR Sundays were very different. Shops closed and largely a "day of rest". My own local train service on Sundays was hourly, four coaches. Now it's half hourly and 10 coaches.

I'm sure if BR had still been around it would have tackled the issue, just as some of the better run TOCs did so soon after privatisation. If you look at the changes to work practices and agreements that BR managed to get through from the early 80s onwards it doesn't bear comparison with what the majority of TOCs have (not) done since.

Absolutely. Unfortunately that's one of the many disadvantages of privatisation - TOCs had little incentive to work through productivity issues, because they wouldn't see the benefits pay off within their remaining franchise term. And driver wages increased much faster than inflation, as it was easier to poach qualified drivers off lower-paid TOCs than to train them from scratch.

Now that the industry is under heavier government control, there's the opportunity to fix some of these issues. But the government seems to have little interest in doing so, much preferring political stunts and red-top headlines.

 

[43066]

And driver wages increased much faster than inflation, as it was easier to poach qualified drivers off lower-paid TOCs than to train them from scratch.

Wages certainly have risen over the years, but it’s worth remembering that some of the largest wage increases have been as a result of the role professionalising and significant changes to Ts and Cs being accepted. It’s no coincidence that the highest paying TOCs in London both have twelve hour movements off spare. For those who don’t know what that means, you could be rostered to start at 0830 and be told with a couple of days notice they you’re now going in for a night shift commencing at 2030. Good luck planning much of a life around that.

There are still drivers on the railway who started in the 80s. An ex colleague of mine has stories of driving a train down to Brighton, going for a few pints during his break and then driving back to London! If you had a spad/stopped short/opened the doors on the wrong side you called the Bobby to “true up”
and nothing really happened. These days it’s (quite rightly!) a completely different world and a few minor lapses in concentration will see you down the road.

BR basic pay wasn’t as low as it first appeared, as it didn’t include various additions such as mileage allowance, which disappeared with the move to clean salary.

Frankly driving trains on the U.K. network today is demanding, enormously responsible and mentally and physically draining and the pay reflects that reality. It’s a shame the role gets so little respect, indeed we are often vilified and regarded with spiteful derision!

 

[Horizon22]

If we please kindly keep the topic on point with regards to what is currently impacting driver shortages. I know this can be an emotive and expansive topic, but try to stay to the questions posed.

 

[357]

Wages certainly have risen over the years, but it’s worth remembering that some of the largest wage increases have been as a result of the role professionalising and significant changes to Ts and Cs being accepted. It’s no coincidence that the highest paying TOCs in London both have twelve hour movements off spare. For those who don’t know what that means, you could be rostered to start at 0830 and be told with a couple of days notice they you’re now going in for a night shift commencing at 2030. Good luck planning much of a life around that.

Fully agree.

However, if you're talking about the two TfL TOCs, there is another place that has a higher salary but the ASLEF page hasn't been updated for a ridiculous amount of years!

And they have 2/2/2 rule. (Start 2hrs earlier, finish 2hrs later, extend by maximum 2hrs)

Edit: Just checked the ASLEF site and I guess you're talking about LNER and Eurostar.

Eurostar is 7k more than the TOC I'm talking about, it's the same as LNER to within a couple of hundred.

 

[SVDW995]

Based on my contract if I'm booked as spare on the link my day can be extended by up to 2hrs to allocate me an uncovered diagram. I can't say no and the extra time is paid on top of my base wage, so that's an example of compulsory overtime. Same as committed Sundays.

How much notice do you get to extend when in spare? We get 72/48hrs

 

[Bald Rick]

I haven’t read the whole thread (sorry), but my understanding is:

1) TOCs typically have enough drivers to cover their base ‘establishment’, ie the work. (And that includes Avanti)
2) The issue is the number of drivers that are productive, ie able to drive trains
3) absence rates continue to be much higher post covid than before (in some TOCs over 10% of drivers are unavailable)
4) Covid triggered a pause in training, both for new drivers, and also for existing drivers needing to do route refresh etc. Plus getting drivers back from long term absence. Therefore there is a significant gap in driver competence (in terms of route and traction), which makes drivers less productive than they are planned to be. This is generally the biggest factor.
5) some TOCs have significant training requirements for new fleet / trains etc. TPE and WMR being two examples. SWR, Avanti and EMR will do shortly.
6) the regularly changing timetables has required release of driver reps to scrutinise short term rosters; this can take 2% of the drivers out on a semi-permanent basis
7) Industrial relations causing a reduction in willingness to work overtime / rest days etc.

Pay doesn’t come into it. I know several drivers, and none of them think they are in any way underpaid for what they do. Most will (privately) say they feel they are very well paid, including those who are not getting any overtime at present.

 

[ComUtoR]

I haven’t read the whole thread (sorry), but my understanding is:

1) TOCs typically have enough drivers to cover their base ‘establishment’, ie the work. (And that includes Avanti)
2) The issue is the number of drivers that are productive, ie able to drive trains
3) absence rates continue to be much higher post covid than before (in some TOCs over 10% of drivers are unavailable)
4) Covid triggered a pause in training, both for new drivers, and also for existing drivers needing to do route refresh etc. Plus getting drivers back from long term absence. Therefore there is a significant gap in driver competence (in terms of route and traction), which makes drivers less productive than they are planned to be. This is generally the biggest factor.
5) some TOCs have significant training requirements for new fleet / trains etc. TPE and WMR being two examples. SWR, Avanti and EMR will do shortly.
6) the regularly changing timetables has required release of driver reps to scrutinise short term rosters; this can take 2% of the drivers out on a semi-permanent basis
7) Industrial relations causing a reduction in willingness to work overtime / rest days etc.

Pay doesn’t come into it. I know several drivers, and none of them think they are in any way underpaid for what they do. Most will (privately) say they feel they are very well paid, including those who are not getting any overtime at present.

Nothing you say is specifically untrue but it shows how broken the TOCs really are.

1) They don't truly have enough to cover their establishment. The calculations that go in into to roster numbers don't work. This is clearly evidenced by number 2.

2) Establishment levels don't work because the sheer number of drivers off at any one time can be insane. Wether its for leave, training, or other business requirements, those spare turns get eaten up. Establishments barely keep up with turnover. In all my years I have never known my TOC to have a full roster for any significant amount of time and because it takes forever to fill the gaps it creates more issues.

3) This should be a factor included in the establishment calculation. There is a distinct lack of foresight and this is where overtime becomes a requirement. The roster is built with spare turns that account for driver absence, training, etc but is so tight that the system will break at the drop of a hat. On any given day, my depot will pretty much use every spare Driver. Nobody wants to see Drivers sitting around doing nothing but that's what should happen. If the system is working and your establishment is full, that means your booked spares are not required.

4) This is a massive overstatement. No doubt that some TOCs really managed their COVID responses badly and there is still a big knock on effect but other TOCs managed without a problem. It's also poor management of rosters and Drivers if you drop out of competence so quickly. I think most still use the "6 month rule" for routes and Traction is debatable. Your point also highlights the issue with turnover rates. If a TOC is in need of new Drivers so badly then you have an issue of why.

5) Again, this is part of the business. My TOC also just trained a significant amount of Drivers for new traction. Its poor management.

6) Reps have been doing this for years. Again, part and parcel of every day TOC life. Semi-permanent is an overstatement methinks.

7) Its not just industrial relations. The willingness to work overtime changes with the wind. The current flavour of the month is Industrial relations. Next big ones are back to school and Christmas.

Pay is a significant factor at my TOC. Its causing many Drivers to leave.

A combination of many factors is contributing to Driver shortage.

 

[Horizon22]

Nothing you say is specifically untrue but it shows how broken the TOCs really are.

1) They don't truly have enough to cover their establishment. The calculations that go in into to roster numbers don't work. This is clearly evidenced by number 2.

2) Establishment levels don't work because the sheer number of drivers off at any one time can be insane. Wether its for leave, training, or other business requirements, those spare turns get eaten up. Establishments barely keep up with turnover. In all my years I have never known my TOC to have a full roster for any significant amount of time and because it takes forever to fill the gaps it creates more issues.

3) This should be a factor included in the establishment calculation. There is a distinct lack of foresight and this is where overtime becomes a requirement. The roster is built with spare turns that account for driver absence, training, etc but is so tight that the system will break at the drop of a hat. On any given day, my depot will pretty much use every spare Driver. Nobody wants to see Drivers sitting around doing nothing but that's what should happen. If the system is working and your establishment is full, that means your booked spares are not required.

4) This is a massive overstatement. No doubt that some TOCs really managed their COVID responses badly and there is still a big knock on effect but other TOCs managed without a problem. It's also poor management of rosters and Drivers if you drop out of competence so quickly. I think most still use the "6 month rule" for routes and Traction is debatable. Your point also highlights the issue with turnover rates. If a TOC is in need of new Drivers so badly then you have an issue of why.

5) Again, this is part of the business. My TOC also just trained a significant amount of Drivers for new traction. Its poor management.

6) Reps have been doing this for years. Again, part and parcel of every day TOC life. Semi-permanent is an overstatement methinks.

7) Its not just industrial relations. The willingness to work overtime changes with the wind. The current flavour of the month is Industrial relations. Next big ones are back to school and Christmas.

Pay is a significant factor at my TOC. Its causing many Drivers to leave.

A combination of many factors is contributing to Driver shortage.

In all fairness, some of those issues - especially pay - are particularly bad at your TOC compared to most others.