I’m not sure about massive risk, though one could certainly say unknown risk, especially with what was known at the time.
What seems to have got many backs up, and this is by no means confined to the railway, is a complete lack of thanks to those people who kept things moving, kept the lights on, kept the supermarkets stocked, etc etc. A lot of focus on the NHS, naff all for anything else, and in fact quite the opposite from Boris Johnson in particular.
Agreed. I think there were several groups of key workers, including railway workers, who definitely were exposing themselves to a higher risk by having to work, for sure. The fact that from the word go it was considered fine to ask some people to carry on "as normal" because of their job, while paying others to stay safely at home, is I feel what meant the lockdown was always a farcical matter, and also caused some bitter division and resentment in our society, sadly. Exacerbated by the constant worshipping of the NHS as if it were some religion. I have no suggestion to make as to how it could have been handled in a better way, other than to feel that it probably could have been.
I would say that I don't feel railway workers were exposed to a massive risk, but certainly a higher one than many, and along with a lot of other key workers.
Compared to others who had to work I would have thought most rail workers were low risk as many trains ran almost empty.
This.
The idea that nothing was done to quickly mitigate the risk is also rather disingenuous. The week before we went into lockdown (when we knew it was coming) I was working with train operators who very quickly put risk controls in place, I saw the lengths taken to make sure the basics actually happened- like sourcing cleaning materials and FFP2 masks for those most at risk (bearing in mind these items were like hens teeth in the early days). In some cases, staff didn't help themselves- I recall one place getting a large box of FFP2 masks- enough to last 3 weeks or so for the key staff- yet they all vanished within a couple of days due to pilfering. I also recall fitting/engineering staff scouring all sources for basics like blueroll (buying with own money then claiming back) so we could supply cab cleaning materials, and going to great lengths to obtain a ready-to-use cleaning fluid which was proven to be anti viral at a point where you just couldn't buy antiseptic cleaners. In many cases there was also a work through rosters to identify those at higher risk (e.g. told to shield, older than 60 etc) so we could avoid putting them in the front line (some went onto furlough topped up to full pay).
I similarly recall how we segregated mess rooms, limited numbers in rooms, and tried to get social distancing right- then the staff who ignored the instructions. We were fortunate in the first couple of months being dry and sunny so we could hold briefing sessions outside in bright sunlight, all at least 2 metres apart.
So I don't buy the idea that railway staff were at high risk or that the train operators didn't do anything. In the early days we all worked off the RDG Flu pandemic guidance note (an internal document so many people won't have seen it) as that was the best advice we had at the time.
There were some key workers who were higher risk than railway workers- and in some cases perhaps less well looked after. Care home staff, delivery staff, supermarket staff, food supply chain workers, utilities workers and refuse collectors come to mind. As do HGV drivers- although not mixing so much, the facilities for them dropped right off, only on a M-way service area was there a chance of a toilet being open and no hot food available. Railway workers are also rather well paid by comparison, I am not saying that's wrong but other workers are equally skilled yet faced a higher risk for much less pay and were more essential (we can more easily do without railways working than we could do without supermarkets and the food supply chain or energy distribution for example).
The railway supply chain also continued working, often in very challenging circumstances.
I am struggling to work out why there is such a rumination on "we were put at risk and not looked after" in parts of the rail sector. Those who complain might want to reflect that the govt has been massively subsidising the trains and in consequence they maintained a level of normal routine compared to many; as a contrast just look what has happened in aviation- pilots (who have had to pay for their training) now don't have work as pilots and are taking any work that comes.
It's now you see it I guess; as a small business owner who qualified for little assistance and saw my turnover drop by 50%, I was hit hard; yet I remember that I am one of the lucky ones, I retained 50% of turnover and came out the other side whereas many other small businesses were devastated as the govt didn't allow them to trade and offered assistance which was more words than substance. It's far better for my mental health to recognise that the glass is half-full rather than half-empty.
TPO
