What is causing driver shortages?

[BrianW]

As an interested observer and now occasional passenger customer I am finding this thread informative and see it in relation to a number of other threads. 'Management' these days has become 'leadership' in terms of how it is referred to- a kind of inflation. Note the job titles used in relation to the Oxenholme 'incident'.

I see the Peter Principle at work- people promoted to their level of incompetence- not perhaps their fault but to be expected, as with applicants to become drivers. Attractive salary, etc. Any selection process will include a number of steps at which an applicant may 'fail'. I appreciate, in both senses, the possibility of training/ coaching to get a candidate 'over the line'- especially when there are important, mission-critical short-term shortages that can't be filled by agency workers or staff transferred from other duties.

But I'm hearing, here and in the media, about poor management and mistreatment of 'valued colleagues'- that's got to stop. It happens in organisations with blame-cultures (like watching a football team in chaos!) and people under stress. Neither of those things is good. Neither is it ok to 'lower the bar' and take on drivers that are unsuitable, eg wrong attitude. I want to feel safe and be safe when I travel- the ultimate in 'customer experience'.

 

[43066]

Which suggests 2 and/or 3 is the underlying reason. They are applying for a role they can't get. Maybe they don't understand what is required or maybe the high salary tempts them to submit an application. That's because the worst thing that can happen is they aren't recruited and the best thing that can happen is they can now afford a house, car, holiday, lifestyle etc. which their current salary doesn't allow.

It can also suggest the selection process needs to be better at weeding out unsuitable people.

Wow, you made instructor quite quickly. Congratulations.

Seconded re. @Economist. Excellent work.

For someone who struggled to pass the dmi and found it hard, maybe you should be a little more supportive to those struggling.

Not exactly sure what a chop ride is, but I'm guessing it's what the mighty think those who struggle should get and pushed out of their job.

Maybe they should do that to those who cant pass a simple chat with a driver manager, and the workplace might be a little more positive and supportive.

But you know what the old saying is. Those who can't do, teach..

@Economist is exactly right and I’m not sure what qualifies someone in a trainee talent pool to pronounce judgment on his abilities as an instructor! For some reason the railway attracts more than its fair share of applicants with a massive sense of entitlement. It’s partly a failing of recruitment that so many get through despite the numbers of applicants per role.

A place on a trainee scheme does not mean you’re guaranteed a key and a job for life. People who fail the training aren’t being pushed out of “their” job. If they can’t perform to the standard required it isn’t their job in the first place.

As a comparison from my nation, a Melbourne, Australia Metro Trains (suburban trains) driver before significant overtime might make a gross (i.e. before tax) of A$115000 a year (GBP68000).

Interesting to hear it’s generally better paid down under. That’s certainly higher than most U.K. drivers get as a basic (TOCs mentioned above excepted).

C2C are on £68,575 but the ASLEF website hasn't been updated for most TOCs in a long time... You'll see what I mean if you look at the c2c page !

I hadn’t appreciated they were on that much.

 

[baz962]

This is limited by the "Hidden rules", which are really just a set of recommendations that came from the Hidden investigation into the Clapham Junction crash in 1988, but which have been fossilised into an industry standard:


In reality most TOCs have far more stringent limits than this, in order to comply with the ROGS Regulations, but some freight operators take things right up to the wire.

But certainly, if you're doing overtime, you can do quite a bit more than your rostered 4/5 days a week.


As per union agreements, the longest rostered shift for Avanti drivers is 10 hours. That's generally the highest it gets for most passenger operators, with the exception of certain depots working over long rural routes, e.g. Wick/Kyle/Mallaig/Fort William/Inverness.


They would just be on their basic pay. There aren't many passenger operators that still have shift/mileage allowances. At Avanti the basic salary for a fully qualified driver, after their first couple of years, is £67,486. That's the second highest for any "franchised" operator - only LNER pay more (and Eurostar, but they are an open access operator with a very unique operating environment).

I think Southwestern are on more now.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

But you know what the old saying is. Those who can't do, teach..

This is a little unfair. Within the rail industry instructors are not pure teachers. When not working one-on-one with a trainee they do their normal job same as everyone else. It's just that the seemingly never-ending need for instructors to instruct means they don't often get the chance to work their way round their link in the normal way. The dedicated teachers in the industry are known as trainers and spend most of their time in a more formal teaching environment in the training school. And I'm not aware of any reason why they would be deserving of having mud slung their way. HR on the other hand...

 

[Economist]

Seconded re. @Economist. Excellent work.

Thank you, it can be good fun but certainly is a challenge.

It can also suggest the selection process needs to be better at weeding out unsuitable people.

I think it might be beneficial for the mechanical comprehension test to be reinstated. I recall when I started a lot of the people came from high pressure roles like the military, the emergency services, or from a practical background like skilled trades. Those of us who had worked in an office usually had experience outside of work of a safety-critical nature. The aptitude tests had been made easier not long before I sat them, I wouldn't be surprised if they had been made easier again. I've seen some people who've gotten through in recent years and I really don't understand how. I've certainly gotten the impression that ability isn't the only thing that's considered these days at certain TOCs and this is no doubt playing a role in driver shortages through attrition in training and beyond.

For some reason the railway attracts more than its fair share of applicants with a massive sense of entitlement. It’s partly a failing of recruitment that so many get through despite the numbers of applicants per role.

A place on a trainee scheme does not mean you’re guaranteed a key and a job for life. People who fail the training aren’t being pushed out of “their” job. If they can’t perform to the standard required it isn’t their job in the first place.

Very true, I've seen a few recently who've struggled a lot when things aren't plain sailing and become grumpy, withdrawn or disinterested when they receive fair and reasonable developmental feedback, I think the "all must have prizes" elements within the education system are partially to blame. Some of those who are lacking in fortitude quit, others get pushed, some qualify and have incidents, a few grow out of it and become very good drivers.

This is a little unfair. Within the rail industry instructors are not pure teachers. When not working one-on-one with a trainee they do their normal job same as everyone else. It's just that the seemingly never-ending need for instructors to instruct means they don't often get the chance to work their way round their link in the normal way. The dedicated teachers in the industry are known as trainers and spend most of their time in a more formal teaching environment in the training school. And I'm not aware of any reason why they would be deserving of having mud slung their way. HR on the other hand...

Well put.sSeaking of HR, I believe it should be renamed "Personnel" as it used to be and it would be improved if it became largely the preserve of people with experience in the operational grades. I've seen drivers with a wealth of experience develop medical problems which sadly curtailed their driving career, yet they are moved towards the door, often by HR. Such drivers would I think be very good at running the recruitment system and have a good idea of how to retain experienced drivers.

 

[ComUtoR]

I think it might be beneficial for the mechanical comprehension test to be reinstated.

The test was no longer relevant and was very easy to study for.

The aptitude tests had been made easier not long before I sat them, I wouldn't be surprised if they had been made easier again.

The tests are regularly reviewed and have moved with the times.

I've seen some people who've gotten through in recent years and I really don't understand how.

Because the tests aren't designed to prove any form of competence. They are there to pick the right people who have the best chance at success, and have the right qualities for the job. If we are really honest, it's not hard to drive a train. That really is the easy bit.

I've certainly gotten the impression that ability isn't the only thing that's considered these days at certain TOCs

Be very careful of where this type of comment leads.

and this is no doubt playing a role in driver shortages through attrition in training and beyond.

I don't believe there has been any real dramatic shift in any statistical measures. The same pattern is being followed that was there many many years ago.

Such drivers would I think be very good at running the recruitment system and have a good idea of how to retain experienced drivers.

Many of those old school Drivers have some deeply ingrained biases. I've seen a fair few leave on medical capability. Some go wilingly, others leave with those chips on their shoulders.

The recruitment team are specialised at their jobs. Just as we are specialised at driving choo choos. Let's leave recruitment to the professionals.

 

[niggill617@gma]

The test was no longer relevant and was very easy to study for.

The test was removed because it was regarded as biased / discriminatory. The OPC regarded the test as a very good indicator of outstanding performance. Too many candidates failed it.

 

[skyhigh]

For someone who struggled to pass the dmi and found it hard, maybe you should be a little more supportive to those struggling.

If I'm being completely honest, the DMI is the easiest part of the whole process. If you find that tough, driving may not be the job for you.

Not exactly sure what a chop ride is, but I'm guessing it's what the mighty think those who struggle should get and pushed out of their job.

Managers and trainers don't want anyone to fail. If you put the effort in and have the right attitude, they will move the world for you to get all the help you need. But at the end of the day - if you can't do the job, you can't do it. You sign up knowing there's a risk that you won't progress if you don't make the grade.

Maybe they should do that to those who cant pass a simple chat with a driver manager, and the workplace might be a little more positive and supportive.

If you recognise you're struggling a simple chat with your manager before your assessment to ask for additional focus on the areas you're struggling will work wonders. Waiting until after the assessment when you've failed and going 'well I knew I was struggling...' won't do you any good. Part of the reason drivers are so well paid is because of the level of expectation that is placed on you. Most places have 2 strike rules for a reason - at our TOC if you fail on the initial assessment you only get reassessed on the parts you failed. You go with an instructor who will hammer what you got wrong until they feel you are ready. If you fail on the same thing the second time round, you're unlikely to ever get it.

But you know what the old saying is. Those who can't do, teach..

A bit of a harsh comment from someone who's never done the job and doesn't know anything about the person they're commenting on...

 

[Economist]

Because the tests aren't designed to prove any form of competence. They are there to pick the right people who have the best chance at success, and have the right qualities for the job. If we are really honest, it's not hard to drive a train. That really is the easy bit.

Agreed, they are there to measure aptitude but I have seen an admittedly fairly small number of trainees who, based on things like knowledge retention and decision making, I could never have envisaged getting through either the tests or management interview. I still thinking aptitude testing is a good predictor of success when the standards are high and it may be the case that the ones who didn't make it stick out in the mind more.

Be very careful of where this type of comment leads.

Quite a few TOCs have been very open about demographic quotas and/or targets, the moment they are used or in any way influence recruitment decisions, ability takes second place.

The recruitment team are specialised at their jobs. Just as we are specialised at driving choo choos. Let's leave recruitment to the professionals.

I think they need more context though, it would be beneficial for them to spend more time shadowing the people who do the jobs they are recruiting for but I appreciate that they are usually understaffed so without that being addressed they simply wouldn't have the time. In hindsight I went a bit far in what i said though I still think that it would be useful for drivers to play a greater role in candidate selection.

If I'm being completely honest, the DMI is the easiest part of the whole process. If you find that tough, driving may not be the job for you.

It's the only part of the process I didn't get through first-time, I was in my early twenties and up against people with much more life experience. I'm terrible at competency-based interviews, I've found the qualified driver interviews generally easier since they tend to be more technical or scenario-based, i.e. "what would you do if?".

 

[XAM2175]

Interesting to hear it’s generally better paid down under. That’s certainly higher than most U.K. drivers get as a basic (TOCs mentioned above excepted).

Cost of living is generally quite a bit higher overall in Australia, especially in areas where most driving jobs are, although the gap's probably narrowed somewhat in recent times.

 

[railfan99]

Cost of living is generally quite a bit higher overall in Australia, especially in areas where most driving jobs are, although the gap's probably narrowed somewhat in recent times.

While we don't want to get sidetracked as this is about driving trains in UK, comparisons are difficult due to variations in prices (and wages/salaries) in different parts of the UK and Oz, and with widely varying train operators, plus the freight v passenger dynamic.

However I'm unsure if what you say is always correct.

For simplicity, I compared the figures for London v Oz's largest city (bearing in mind the UK doesn't have 'states'):

From numbeo:

Cost of Living Comparison Between London and Sydney ​

You would need around 4,912.47£ (8,352.21A$) in Sydney to maintain the same standard of life that you can have with 5,100.00£ in London (assuming you rent in both cities). This calculation uses our Cost of Living Plus Rent Index to compare cost of living. This assumes net earnings (after income tax). You can change the amount in this calculation.

Indices Difference
Consumer Prices in Sydney are 7.16% higher than in London (without rent)
Consumer Prices Including Rent in Sydney are 3.68% lower than in London
Rent Prices in Sydney are 18.36% lower than in London
Restaurant Prices in Sydney are 6.75% lower than in London
Groceries Prices in Sydney are 39.20% higher than in London
Local Purchasing Power in Sydney is 32.48% higher than in London

 

[Watershed]

While we don't want to get sidetracked as this is about driving trains in UK, comparisons are difficult due to variations in prices (and wages/salaries) in different parts of the UK and Oz, and with widely varying train operators, plus the freight v passenger dynamic.

However I'm unsure if what you say is always correct.

For simplicity, I compared the figures for London v Oz's largest city (bearing in mind the UK doesn't have 'states'):

From numbeo:

Cost of Living Comparison Between London and Sydney ​

You would need around 4,912.47£ (8,352.21A$) in Sydney to maintain the same standard of life that you can have with 5,100.00£ in London (assuming you rent in both cities). This calculation uses our Cost of Living Plus Rent Index to compare cost of living. This assumes net earnings (after income tax). You can change the amount in this calculation.

Indices Difference
Consumer Prices in Sydney are 7.16% higher than in London (without rent)
Consumer Prices Including Rent in Sydney are 3.68% lower than in London
Rent Prices in Sydney are 18.36% lower than in London
Restaurant Prices in Sydney are 6.75% lower than in London
Groceries Prices in Sydney are 39.20% higher than in London
Local Purchasing Power in Sydney is 32.48% higher than in London

How much would you earn, after tax and any health insurance you might need, on the salary you mentioned?

 

[niggill617@gma]

Managers and trainers don't want anyone to fail. If you put the effort in and have the right attitude, they will move the world for you to get all the help you need. But at the end of the day - if you can't do the job, you can't do it. You sign up knowing there's a risk that you won't progress if you don't make the grade.

I only know of two drivers failing the driving course: 1. Attitude and unable to remember anything, 2. The other was of a very nervous disposition with machinery and motion. Do more drivers fail the course these days?

 

[ComUtoR]

The test was removed because it was regarded as biased / discriminatory

Some of the tests are still discriminatory. It's part of the reasons why they are constantly reviewed.

Too many candidates failed it.

Which is crazy because you could literally buy it in shops.

 

[CardiffDan]

If I'm being completely honest, the DMI is the easiest part of the whole process. If you find that tough, driving may not be the job for you.

Managers and trainers don't want anyone to fail. If you put the effort in and have the right attitude, they will move the world for you to get all the help you need. But at the end of the day - if you can't do the job, you can't do it. You sign up knowing there's a risk that you won't progress if you don't make the grade.

If you recognise you're struggling a simple chat with your manager before your assessment to ask for additional focus on the areas you're struggling will work wonders. Waiting until after the assessment when you've failed and going 'well I knew I was struggling...' won't do you any good. Part of the reason drivers are so well paid is because of the level of expectation that is placed on you. Most places have 2 strike rules for a reason - at our TOC if you fail on the initial assessment you only get reassessed on the parts you failed. You go with an instructor who will hammer what you got wrong until they feel you are ready. If you fail on the same thing the second time round, you're unlikely to ever get it.

A bit of a harsh comment from someone who's never done the job and doesn't know anything about the person they're commenting on...

The dmi dig I made was at the poster I quoted.
I'm assuming he can do the job as he's now an instructor.

I'll hold my hands up and admit my comments were out if order. Long and bad day in work and I wrote it in a bad mood.

I've seen many people fail. My police training a few were given chance after chance until they were asked/told to leave. Same when I worked in the prison. I guess if you can't demonstrate you're going to be safe alone you don't deserve the chance to earn a very good wage

 

[Horizon22]

We are moving away from the core topic here though of driver shortages; the topic of driver training whilst interesting would be better placed in a new thread if people wish to continue the conversation.

Anyone wishing to discuss new drivers and investigation of incidents can find them in this thread.

 

[niggill617@gma]

Some of the tests are still discriminatory. It's part of the reasons why they are constantly reviewed.

The mechanical test generally favoured male applicants, and generally discriminated against females, so it was dropped from the process. This was featured within the ASLEF Journal I think?

How do the other tests discriminate against anyone?

 

[ComUtoR]

How do the other tests discriminate against anyone?

They audit the testing process and the scoring system. Both female and BAME have higher failure rates.

 

[niggill617@gma]

They audit the testing process and the scoring system. Both female and BAME have higher failure rates.

It does suggests elements of psychometric testing is the mismeasure of mankind?

The tests certainly are not the reason for driver shortages though, the whole recruitment process is one big feeding frenzy.

 

[railfan99]

How much would you earn, after tax and any health insurance you might need, on the salary you mentioned?

I accessed the Australian Taxation Office simple income tax calculator.

This doesn't take account of deductions (that reduce taxable income, such as donations to complying charities or work-to-work-direct travel, as home-to-work is obviously not claimable) or rebates (perhaps not applicable here).

I assumed the person was single, so on taxable income of A$115000 for the tax year of 2021-22 that ended on 30 June 2022 (note the difference in FYs compared to UK), tax payable should be A$27842 plus (if no private health insurance) a Medicare levy of A$2300 (effectively another tax). This gives net annual income of A$84858 or on today's exchange rate after tax income of GBP49705 annually, or around GBP953 per week, or GBP1906 per fortnight, net.

In Australia, the Goods and Services Tax is 10 per cent but does not apply to fresh food such as fruit and vegetables. IIRC it also doesn't apply to some services such as education or health.

State governments levy property taxes such as stamp duty, which varies between the six states and two mainland territories. Local governments (councils as in UK) have an annual rates charge plus a smaller one for household waste collection: this varies hugely, with rates per A$ of capital improved or net annual value significantly lower in major city individual municpalities but much higher in rural cities and rural shires (due largely to the cost of maintaining local roads that state road authorities don't touch). You don't have State governments in the UK so this is the sort of difference that must be mentioned to allow some sort of an approximate comparison.

Depending on in which state train drivers are, and whether freight or passenger, earnings may vary. For instance Sydney Trains drivers receive less than Melbourne Metro Trains drivers IIRC.

Lately there has been a shortage of freight train drivers in particular, although not apparently as bad as for truck drivers who are on lower wages than train drivers. Some allegedly get 'pinched' by the geographically discrete isolated iron ore railways in the far northwest of Western Australia (only some trains are automated there). Our unemployment rate overall is very low at only 3.4 per cent (but a recession may change that, and as always, there's some 'underemployment', sometimes just people whinging or unrealistically wishing, and at other times, more genuine).

Rail's market share is 57 per cent of freight across the Nullarbor desert (Melbourne or Sydney/Parkes to Perth) with heaps of intermodal trains each week, aided by coastal shipping's decline and high costs of road transport, but less than 30 per cent Melbourne- Brisbane on the east coast, and negligible for shorter hauls such as Melbourne-Sydney (perhaps one per cent). However agricultural traffic is booming: listed company GrainCorp is confident that it'll be three great harvests in a row, needed to feed Asia and even Europeans given poor harvests in France, and miners are doing well. Thermal coal traffic in the Hunter Valley (Newcastle NSW) is trying to cope with huge international demand given sanctions on Russia, and while metallurgical coal from Queensland has fallen in price, demand I gather is still good. Iron ore's price has slumped last I read. Lithium is booming.

 

[Watershed]

I accessed the Australian Taxation Office simple income tax calculator.

This doesn't take account of deductions (that reduce taxable income, such as donations to complying charities or work-to-work-direct travel, as home-to-work is obviously not claimable) or rebates (perhaps not applicable here).

I assumed the person was single, so on taxable income of A$115000 for the tax year of 2021-22 that ended on 30 June 2022 (note the difference in FYs compared to UK), tax payable should be A$27842 plus (if no private health insurance) a Medicare levy of A$2300 (effectively another tax). This gives net annual income of A$84858 or on today's exchange rate after tax income of GBP49705 annually, or around GBP953 per week, or GBP1906 per fortnight, net.

In Australia, the Goods and Services Tax is 10 per cent but does not apply to fresh food such as fruit and vegetables. IIRC it also doesn't apply to some services such as education or health.

State governments levy property taxes such as stamp duty, which varies between the six states and two mainland territories. Local governments (councils as in UK) have an annual rates charge plus a smaller one for household waste collection: this varies hugely, with rates per A$ of capital improved or net annual value significantly lower in major city individual municpalities but much higher in rural cities and rural shires (due largely to the cost of maintaining local roads that state road authorities don't touch). You don't have State governments in the UK so this is the sort of difference that must be mentioned to allow some sort of an approximate comparison.

Depending on in which state train drivers are, and whether freight or passenger, earnings may vary. For instance Sydney Trains drivers receive less than Melbourne Metro Trains drivers IIRC.

Thanks. By way of comparison, a driver in the UK would earn £47,469 net per year on that salary, though that's before pension deductions which vary by TOC and so could reduce that by a few thousand.

VAT here is 20% (though temporary cuts to this are mooted) and there is also stamp duty. Council tax is also payable but isn't directly linked to the value of your property - rather is is linked to the band that your property fell into in 1991. If built more recently than that, valuations are backdated to work out what band the property would have fallen into in 1991.

 

[ComUtoR]

The tests certainly are not the reason for driver shortages though, the whole recruitment process is one big feeding frenzy.

Agreed

 

[railfan99]

Thanks. By way of comparison, a driver in the UK would earn £47,469 net per year on that salary, though that's before pension deductions which vary by TOC and so could reduce that by a few thousand.

So Warershed, which of the two nations has the 'better' living standards do you suspect? A hard comparison for me as I've not lived in the UK. Bear in mind I'm only comparing 'monetary' indicators, not aspects such as climate, housing standards and prices and so on.

 

[Watershed]

So Warershed, which of the two nations has the 'better' living standards do you suspect? A hard comparison for me as I've not lived in the UK. Bear in mind I'm only comparing 'monetary' indicators, not aspects such as climate, housing standards and prices and so on.

I think it would depend hugely on where you're living. If you lived on that sort of salary in London, you'd have a significantly worse quality of living than if you did so in Cardiff or Glasgow, for instance. There are generally London or southeast weightings but they don't tend to fully compensate for the increased cost of housing.

Overall I'd be inclined to say driver pay is slightly better in the UK if you live outside of expensive areas, and similar in London as compared to Melbourne/Sydney.

 

[Need2]

They audit the testing process and the scoring system. Both female and BAME have higher failure rates.

Do you mean the whole recruitment process or just paper/computer tests?

 

[ComUtoR]

Do you mean the whole recruitment process or just paper/computer tests?

It's difficult to speak for the whole process as I only have evidence for one small part.

Is it probably biassed as a whole ? Most likely. The railway is only just moving out of the dark ages. It's still a white/male dominated industry. That is still reflected in recruitment figures.