-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Qualified move to LNER
- Thread starter 387star
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Internal chatter suggests they want a number of qualified drivers because the training demand can't be met with apprentices alone. Just waiting for the DfT to give them the nod, but good luck either way!
It'll likely be the usual caveats from when they last took qualified drivers, clean record etc. Think they want 5 years clean if you've had a minor incident in the past. I *think* the likes of CAT A SPADs are still a no-no.
We've had a few excellent trainees come through, but also a lot who've gone on to cause heaps of trouble you don't get from qualified intakes. A balance of the two is the best way to go otherwise you end up with a massive experience gap.
It'll likely be the usual caveats from when they last took qualified drivers, clean record etc. Think they want 5 years clean if you've had a minor incident in the past. I *think* the likes of CAT A SPADs are still a no-no.
We've had a few excellent trainees come through, but also a lot who've gone on to cause heaps of trouble you don't get from qualified intakes. A balance of the two is the best way to go otherwise you end up with a massive experience gap.
irish_rail
Established Member
So you have 20 years incident free but had an AWS slow to cancel 4 years ago and you'd be rejected?! Wow , someone has ideas above their station methinks.
Interesting to know. The current driver apprentice recruitment campaign specifically states that qualified drivers cannot apply, and that they’ll indicate on the website as and when that position changes.
AFAIK a slow to cancel isn’t counted as a safety of the line incident anywhere. It certainly shouldn’t be.
irish_rail
Established Member
Tis on GWR, crazy as that sounds! I agree though, it really shouldn't be!
I don't decide the criteria. As I understand it it was set almost ten years ago when a number of incidents were investigated and it was found that a couple of drivers they'd taken on had poor safety of the line records at their previous TOC. From then on they mandated clean records.
However I don't believe an missed AWS counts. Is it even on that TOC form?
As well as a CAT A SPAD we're taking fail to calls, stop shorts with doors released, TPWS activations/interventions, speeding etc. There's probably a more exhaustive list somewhere but those are the conditions I had to meet when I transfered over.
I’m sure it’s on the ATOC form.
I agree it shouldn’t be though.
Driver068
Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2017
- Messages
- 224
What regardless on how clean your SOL is and other potential attributes and experience you may of gained with in your respective TOC?
Are you an LNER employee??
I get there I a set criteria as with many TOCs, but to hold an incident against them for the duration of their career is potentially discrimination.
I think with LNER the potentially want to employ a perfect employee but unfortunately that's not possible. LNER can NOT say what you said, but then keep quiet the amount of experienced Drivers who have served say 20 years down to new drivers of 3 to 5 years that have had numerous incidents.
LNER have had alot of incidents over the years including what you have mentioned above but they can't say well you had a X incident more than 5 years ago so we wont touch you. There are alot of driver's who have made errors in the early part of their career but been clean 5 to 10 years. Does not make them a bad driver, nor does a clean safety record mean there a good driver. I know a few drivers with clean records but their route knowledge is pretty poor along with other aspects of the job.
Point being if that's correct with what you say then not only could it be seen as discriminatory but also elitist, every applicant should be taken on a case by case basis with yes a certain criteria to meet. But not to the extremities of holding a mistake against them for the remainder of their careers.
There are many professional individuals who have made mistakes in all walks of life to where they have bounced back and are really good professionals in what they do.
Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 15,242
It might be discrimination, as any choice is, but it’s not discrimination in a legal sense.
Yes, I transferred over from another London TOC. It's not a case of you've had this incident 10 years ago so it's an automatic rejection, but rather a 5 year clear SOL record from whenever that incident was. Isn't this common across a lot of companies nowadays?
I know this because a few of us new entrants queried why there were only about half of us at induction compared to the number of drivers they said they needed off that particular recruitment drive. The answer given was despite many interviewing well, they weren't progressed when their SOL records were checked and that it was mandated from much higher up than the driver managers. So totally out of their hands by the sounds of it.
They were new rules brought in after some quite serious incidents and I'd be surprised if there's any discrimination case to answer given the nature of the job. Don't airlines do the same thing with pilots if you have an aviation incident/accident to your name?
A former colleague of mine had an incident during his notice period, first in approx 20 years I believe, and when he informed the other TOC (TPE in this case) they withdrew the offer and he had to cancel plans to move north with his family as well as try to pull his notice!
jettofab
Member
As previously said, it's not discrimination in any legal sense as SOL record is not a protected characteristic funnily enough. And it may be elitist but LNER are free to set whatever criteria they want when taking on staff, provided they don't discriminate illegally. I don't disagree that it is much more complicated than clean record = good driver, SOL incident = bad driver and that there should perhaps be discussions around how, for how long and under what circumstances incidents are recorded. No doubt if LNER are not able to get the number of staff they require via a qualified intake with the criteria given combined with taking on trainees then they will have to review their requirements.
I don't work for LNER, have never worked for them and whilst I'd never say never, have no intention of applying to work for them.
I don't work for LNER, have never worked for them and whilst I'd never say never, have no intention of applying to work for them.
Ultimately, if you have a brilliant driver with a clean SOL vs a brilliant driver with an AWS fail to cancel 20 years ago, all other things being equal, the latter will lose out every time.
It's not fair on the individual driver, I agree, but given the sheer numbers of the former, you often (not always) need a clean sheet to even compete with other applicants.
It's not fair on the individual driver, I agree, but given the sheer numbers of the former, you often (not always) need a clean sheet to even compete with other applicants.
notadriver
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 3,653
Would already signing the London to Edinburgh route and 80x traction give an advantage as well as clean SOL ?
Unlikely as you’d still be required to learn the route and traction again.
I think the fairest way of assessing candidates is a very technical interview process with a rules exam and lots of face-to-face technical questions. I'm admittedly a bit biased because it's how I got the qualified driver move to my current TOC.
The DfT seem to be very anti-competitive for what is supposed to be a privatised railway.
The DfT seem to be very anti-competitive for what is supposed to be a privatised railway.
greatkingrat
Established Member
- Joined
- 20 Jan 2011
- Messages
- 2,768
Although the people who can say the right things in interviews aren't always the best candidates in practice.
Pretty sure it doesn’t count in the sense of being formally held against you, though?
You aren’t taken off, drug and alcohol tested, put on a plan, or anything along those lines, as would happen for a safety of the line incident. Where I am it seems to be viewed more like a minor improvement point on a download.
I wonder if there’s a little bit of wanting to make it harder to move in order to remove the competitive market for qualified drivers that has driven up salaries.
That said, there’s also a clear need for the industry to encourage more “off the street” recruitment of new entrants, especially of younger candidates, as the demographics of the grade are such that a very high % of drivers will retire over the next 10-15 years. I can’t recall the exact figure, but something ridiculous like 40% of all current drivers are over 50.
Not necessarily....
At FOC’s maybe, haven’t heard of any TOC’s that will allow you to transfer routes or traction from company to company. Unless you know otherwise?
I was allowed to transfer my route from one TOC to another but apparently it's quite a new thing with them, I just had to be assessed on the route driving over it and complete the assesment paper that goes with it.
PudseyBearHST
Member
Not transfer directly but you could definitely save on the route learning time if both the driver and company are happy. Pass out assessment and signing a bit of paper only takes a day compared to the several weeks learning a route.
The “fail to cancel” would come under any other operating incidents. Generally it’s only the first group TOCs that treat it as a safety incident.
Even if you don’t fully meet the requirements for the job, you can still apply for it anyway and let them be the ones to say no to you. Not just when it comes to safety incidents but even experience. Some companies might say they require 3 years driving but in reality they’ve taken on people before with less than that. Even Eurostar did this quite recently I believe and that’s got to be fairly competitive.
PupCuff
Member
The concept of the specific umbrella of 'SOL incidents' is a bit of a myth. There is no single industry-adopted list of whether a given incident would be considered as part of an individual's safety of the line history. Some operators may maintain a list of incident types they would and would not consider SOL incidents but yes, this will differ depending on who you are applying to. Anecdotally, both my current and previous TOC would class an AWS late to acknowledge under the 'safety of the line' banner. I'm not privy to how recruitment decisions are or were taken in considering those safety records though.
TreacleMiller
Member
Not the case.
Basic conversion course 802 to 800/801 lasts about two days and rebrief on the route plus assessment. It's been done for training roles recently.
Depots are a different story obviously.
It wouldn’t be a conversion course though. You’d arrive at new company not signing any traction.
I’m surprised to hear that. The ORR stance is the route card belongs to the TOC not the driver. Unless they have softened recently?
PudseyBearHST
Member
Yes but you still have to do the assessment to be deemed competent so there’s no issue and not really transferring it directly. You’re just eliminating/reducing the route learning which is all very specific and negotiated by ASLEF anyway. Route learning times vary by company and even by depot so there’s no set standard.
You’d also need the training.
It's becoming more acceptable/common for existing route and/or traction knowledge to be transferable. You would need to be re-assessed by your new employer and potentially require any necessary briefs etc, but the full training course (traction) or number of route learning trips would not be required. This could also apply for conversion from 802 to 800/801 as the two forms of traction are effectively the same.
PudseyBearHST
Member
Not the full training no. The company can do a Training Needs Analysis to determine how much training you actually need if you already sign a route/traction.
TreacleMiller
Member
Might want to check what the question was you responded to.
If an applicant signs the route and the 80X traction (they won't have exact 801/800 traction signed off already) it's a two day conversion, plus a route brief and assessment. It's been done recently.
Depot specific knowledge requires training and that's that.