ECML Disruption - Saturday 27th December

[bramling]

In answer to a question above unless things have changed I understood Class 365s weren't cleared to use Canonbury Chord, only Class 317s and unfortunately GTR don't have many of these.

I seem to recall a block in the same area some years back where NX (now AGA) Class 317s were borrowed to cover a shortfall but that costs money and doubtless creates paperwork.

I think this *was* the case, but at some point the relevant certification was done. Certainly 365s were operating regularly to Canonbury on the 28th.

 

[Hyphen]

is there any other industry where staff are expected to be on call in addition to a shift pattern meaning that cover should be available at all times anyway?

Try the IT industry - there's loads of this sort of thing.

In my line of work (IT in a smallish private healthcare organisation), my team operates our organisation's helpdesk 9-5 and responds to all types of calls (usually referred to as first/second/third-line). Whilst my real job is Manager of the dept, I'm the only staff member of the in-house team who is classed as being able to respond to third-line calls.

Outside of those hours we have outsourced 24/7 cover for our helpdesk, which covers first-line inside the contract. The first-line guys at that company will log and triage all calls onto our helpdesk, closing any off they can, especially if it's something daft like no paper in a printer. If something bigger happens which needs to be resolved ASAP, they have a second-line available (who may also be in bed!) who can take the call and resolve it, billing us for any hours as necessary (the number of these calls a year are so few, it's cheaper not to have this service in the contract).

Should safety of life be an issue (something which can and does happen in healthcare scenarios), that will instantly be forwarded to the on-call manager for the relevant hospital/care home (if they weren't the one to report the issue), who can make a decision to call me. Effectively that places me on-call 24/7/365, although the number of calls for this sort of thing is maybe 1 or 2 a year. Do I get handsomely remunerated for this role? Noooope

That said, I am in a management position and it works well enough for me, and it isn't something I would expect of lower-grade staff in my team.

 

[infobleep]

Try the IT industry - there's loads of this sort of thing.

In my line of work (IT in a smallish private healthcare organisation), my team operates our organisation's helpdesk 9-5 and responds to all types of calls (usually referred to as first/second/third-line). Whilst my real job is Manager of the dept, I'm the only staff member of the in-house team who is classed as being able to respond to third-line calls.

Outside of those hours we have outsourced 24/7 cover for our helpdesk, which covers first-line inside the contract. The first-line guys at that company will log and triage all calls onto our helpdesk, closing any off they can, especially if it's something daft like no paper in a printer. If something bigger happens which needs to be resolved ASAP, they have a second-line available (who may also be in bed!) who can take the call and resolve it, billing us for any hours as necessary (the number of these calls a year are so few, it's cheaper not to have this service in the contract).

Should safety of life be an issue (something which can and does happen in healthcare scenarios), that will instantly be forwarded to the on-call manager for the relevant hospital/care home (if they weren't the one to report the issue), who can make a decision to call me. Effectively that places me on-call 24/7/365, although the number of calls for this sort of thing is maybe 1 or 2 a year. Do I get handsomely remunerated for this role? Noooope

That said, I am in a management position and it works well enough for me, and it isn't something I would expect of lower-grade staff in my team.

To be fair you don't work a shift pattern or do you?

 

[Hyphen]

To be fair you don't work a shift pattern or do you?

Aah, I didn't spot that bit

 

[455driver]

I had *assumed* that the ridiculous figures being quoted (£2,500 per week to be on-call) were just in jest, but I do wonder at times.

My figure is no more ridiculous than the £25 a week being touted above!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I take it Network Rail staff and their sub contractors do not work shift patterns and are on call?

Do the fire brigade work shift patterns and be on call?

I'm not saying drivers should or should not be on call. Just thinking of possible examples where other people might be.

Can you compare like for like please, my shifts are not fixed other than being earlies (sign on between 0345 and 0700), middles (sign on between 0630 and 1300), lates (sign on between 1245 and 1900) and nights (sign on between 2100 and 2245).
You are trying to compare us with people that work the 'standard' pattern of 0600-1400, 1400-2200 and 2200-0600, not quite the same is it even though they are both shift work!

 

[ainsworth74]

My figure is no more ridiculous than the £25 a week being touted above!

Maybe (in terms of zeros) you could meet in the middle at £250?

 

[455driver]

Maybe (in terms of zeros) you could meet in the middle at £250?

I will meet in the proper middle, £1237.50 which is a much nicer figure than your 'middle' figure!
Nice try though!

 

[GB]

It is entirely possible for shift workers (including drivers with odd shifts) to have on call duties...it just needs either careful rostering or for the company to be prepared to cover your shift the next day.

At GBRf you could be rostered on call 0930-1900 for example, but the company policy states during your on call period you can be rostered a 12hr turn. So you can get a call at 1830, start at 1900 and finish at 0700. If you don't get called out you get paid half the hours off your annual contract. Bare also in mind we do not get paid overtime rates or have a separate on call payment....not even the £25 mentioned above.

It sucks but it's part of the employment contract but you can be your bottom dollar that if on call wasn't part of the contract and the company wanted to bring it in, the employees and the union would rightly fight for suitable renumeration.

 

[carriageline]

The closest us in the signalling grade have is being spare, which means we stay at home unless they require us. But this is a rostered part of our roster (ie 1 week out of a 5 week rotation is spent being spare) so they don't have to worry about your next workings.

But of course, if you wanted that sort of system you would have to hire a lot more staff!!

 

[Tomnick]

The GBRf example's an interesting one, thanks - how often are you rostered on-call as opposed to a booked turn? At least you do get paid for being on-call though, even if it's effectively half pay - what seems to be proposed with the £25 is otherwise unpaid on-call, whereas yours sounds closer to a spare turn, albeit without the full pay that we'd get for that. Not that I can remember what a spare turn is

My figure is no more ridiculous than the £25 a week being touted above!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Can you compare like for like please, my shifts are not fixed other than being earlies (sign on between 0345 and 0700), middles (sign on between 0630 and 1300), lates (sign on between 1245 and 1900) and nights (sign on between 2100 and 2245).
You are trying to compare us with people that work the 'standard' pattern of 0600-1400, 1400-2200 and 2200-0600, not quite the same is it even though they are both shift work!

The principle's exactly the same though, and it's just as impractical to have 24/7 on-call cover unless it's on the basis of spare turns as above!

 

[Class 170101]

Try the IT industry - there's loads of this sort of thing.

In my line of work (IT in a smallish private healthcare organisation), my team operates our organisation's helpdesk 9-5 and responds to all types of calls (usually referred to as first/second/third-line). Whilst my real job is Manager of the dept, I'm the only staff member of the in-house team who is classed as being able to respond to third-line calls.

Outside of those hours we have outsourced 24/7 cover for our helpdesk, which covers first-line inside the contract. The first-line guys at that company will log and triage all calls onto our helpdesk, closing any off they can, especially if it's something daft like no paper in a printer. If something bigger happens which needs to be resolved ASAP, they have a second-line available (who may also be in bed!) who can take the call and r
esolve it, billing us for any hours as necessary (the number of these calls a year are so few, it's cheaper not to have this service in the contract).

Should safety of life be an issue (something which can and does happen in healthcare scenarios), that will instantly be forwarded to the on-call manager for the relevant hospital/care home (if they weren't the one to report the issue), who can make a decision to call me. Effectively that places me on-call 24/7/365, although the number of calls for this sort of thing is maybe 1 or 2 a year. Do I get handsomely remunerated for this role? Noooope

That said, I am in a management position and it works well enough for me, and it isn't something I would expect of lower-grade staff in my team.

Given the rail policy on drinking and drugs what policy does your employer follow as it doesn't sound practical to be on call 365 days a year. How about holidays cover?

 

[455refurb]

"Send more staff" was no doubt simply not an option for EC last Saturday, I'll bet every last person not on duty was phoned and offered overtime.

In my job the department works a 24/7 shift roster in TV transmission. The place simply has to be staffed or stuff might not make it onto the telly. There's a small amount of extra capacity built in, but in unforseen circumstances, eg multiple sickness, you do need overtime. People are, on the whole, unwilling to work rest days, even when money is thrown at them, and that's perfectly understandable. People are more likely to do overtime to help out a colleague than the company, and I'm sure it's the same on the railway. If you were asked on Friday in your 9-5 job to come in for the day on Saturday, how much would you really want to?

We have a small number of people who work an on-call rota for engineering support only. When on call they are paid for it (more than £25!!) and they get a sliding scale of payments if they are called out. It is different for them as it is not voluntary - they are expected to answer the phone (even at 2am) and come in if necessary, so it's very disruptive to the work/life balance.

Overtime and on-call represent a much cheaper option for the employer than having more staff. There's less overhead in terms of pensions and other costs. But the payback is that you sometimes don't have enough people (or the right people) on duty when you need them and you might not be able to persuade the people you want to come in. It all comes down to cost versus risk.

 

[Tomnick]

That sounds almost exactly the same as the situation on the railway. There's a certain amount of spare capacity on a day-to-day basis - although it's rare for us, as signalmen, to be rostered spare (on our patch at least), we're quite often offered overtime, sometimes at short notice, to fill a gap somewhere - it's our choice whether we take it or not, but they almost always manage to find someone. The MOM - the first response to any incidents or faults from the operating side - provides cover on a 24/7 shift pattern, and can drop into a signal box if necessary (usually if someone goes sick on the job or at very short notice, or if there's no other way of covering the work), but again this can be supplemented by phoning round for reinforcements if necessary, perhaps if the MOM's already dealing with something else. For the most part, it works - but if it's not enough, they'll resort to the on-call manager who'll come out to help too.

 

[PHILIPE]

In order to try and get back on thread again, has anybody aware of any announcement re apologies from ECML about the debacle. Even though Network Rail were responsible, the TOC is the contact so far as passengers were concerned. What about info being given to passengers, especially at Finsbury Park. Did they have staff there in an organisational role.

 

[Hyphen]

Given the rail policy on drinking and drugs what policy does your employer follow as it doesn't sound practical to be on call 365 days a year. How about holidays cover?

I don't drink or do drugs anyway

Holiday cover, we arrange for someone suitably third-line and familiar with our infrastructure at the outsourced co to be available on-call for that duration.

 

[ringi]

Part of the problem was that most passengers had cases and a lot of them had children that make it a lot worse then 7/7 along with the high demand in BOTH directions. 7/7 only had a high demand of people wishing to leave London. A lot of the passengers at Christmas also are not used to using the transport system in London.

Normally when work overruns, it is just passengers getting INTO London in the morning. This time there were lots of passengers wishing to leave London as well. I cannot think of another time of year when the trains are so full in BOTH directions at the same time.

Running as many (long) trains from Cambridge to Liverpool St, and from Peterborough to Cambridge would have help take load from Finsbury Park.

Could couches also not have been used between MK and Stevenage with some trains from Peterborough turning round at Stevenage?

Overall it may just be best to shut the railway between Christmas and new year when this level of work needs doing, letting people plan on using couches instead. (And forcing London employers to provide hotels for staff or to shut down. Rather then just expecting the staff to cope with what the employer knows will be a poor transport system.)

Also don’t sell tickets for 100% of the seats in advance when you know that there are lots of working going on!!! This should be the case on ALL trains not get the lines with the work planned, so that there is spare capacity elsewhere in the system.

 

[najaB]

Overall it may just be best to shut the railway between Christmas and new year when this level of work needs doing, letting people plan on using couches instead.

While I know you meant coaches, your typo actually resulted in a better plan.

 

[po8crg]

While I know you meant coaches, your typo actually resulted in a better plan.

Where's the like button gone?

 

[455driver]

Could couches also not have been used between MK and Stevenage with some trains from Peterborough turning round at Stevenage?

Overall it may just be best to shut the railway between Christmas and new year when this level of work needs doing, letting people plan on using couches instead. (And forcing London employers to provide hotels for staff or to shut down. Rather then just expecting the staff to cope with what the employer knows will be a poor transport system.)

Also don’t sell tickets for 100% of the seats in advance when you know that there are lots of working going on!!! This should be the case on ALL trains not get the lines with the work planned, so that there is spare capacity elsewhere in the system.

I dont see how giving everyone a comfy sofa would have helped but hey ho!
Or did you mean coaches?

I take it you are either a troll or 7 years old?

Why close the railways completely for over a week when we get enough moans about have 2 days off!

They didnt sell tickets for 100% of seats in advance, a lot of travellers would have been on off peak tickets meaning they can catch any train they want (within reason).
Is your 'solution' to be used during the normal peak times as well, you know when we can get over 1000 people on an 8 coach train and be leaving several hundred behind at stations?

I take it you are just making assumptions using what little knowledge you actually have rather than any viable solutions!

 

[Hadders]

I think ringi makes some valid observations though I don't agree with couches, coaches or shutting the railway for a week.

I know the plan for Finsbury Park was hastily put together on Boxing Day but I would have considered:

- Directing all Cambridge passengers to Liverpool Street
- Terminating all East Coast services at Peterborough and Stevenage.
- Operating 12 coach shuttles from Peterborough to Finsbury (calling Stevenage only). These would primarily take displaced EC passengers.
- Welwyn Garden City, Hatfield and Potters Bar to be served by inner suburban trains only and running these non-stop through Finsbury Park.

 

[DelayRepay]

Could couches also not have been used between MK and Stevenage with some trains from Peterborough turning round at Stevenage?

West Coast mainline was closed due to planned works at Watford, they were already using coaches between Hemel and Stanmore to connect with the tube.

Coaches to Luton for Thameslink services might have been an option, but where do you get enough coaches from at that time of year at short notice, to make enough of a difference?

 

[MichaelJP59]

I gather NR were supposed to report preliminary findings on the KGX/FPK debacle by the end of last week, anyone seen anything yet?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I gather NR were supposed to report preliminary findings on the KGX/FPK debacle by the end of last week, anyone seen anything yet?

Statement today by Patrick McLoughlin in the Commons, covering the King's Cross and Paddington events on 27 December. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/christmas-rail-disruption
Nothing really new, in particular it doesn't say what went wrong at King's Cross.

It had been planned to reopen 2 lines on 27 December (2014) to operate a limited service into and out of King’s Cross.
Some elements of the work took longer than expected.

and a bit later on:

Mark Carne has ordered urgent review of what went wrong and to provide a report by the end of this week.
It will be published

It seems to take a tough line with Network Rail, reminding them of their obligations and saying they will "learn lessons".
Mark Carne's report will be interesting - it's a key test for him.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Statement today by Patrick McLoughlin in the Commons, covering the King's Cross and Paddington events on 27 December. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/christmas-rail-disruption
Nothing really new, in particular it doesn't say what went wrong at King's Cross.

and a bit later on:


It seems to take a tough line with Network Rail, reminding them of their obligations and saying they will "learn lessons".
Mark Carne's report will be interesting - it's a key test for him.

Was it a set of Whitworth spanners they were short of?

 

[Taunton]

It seems to take a tough line with Network Rail, reminding them of their obligations and saying they will "learn lessons".

I seem to remember they were to "learn lessons" after the Rugby overrun fiasco of a couple of Christmases ago. Are they the same lessons to be learned yet again or somewhat different lessons?

Apparently today, January 5, the London Bridge works, which had helped themselves to well over the "shutting the railway for a week" disdainfully dismissed above, have also had a chaotic ending. Have ANY of the major works over the Christmas/New Year period delivered anything like a positive outcome?

 

[Crossover]

As a driver I always get a sick sense of satisfaction when arriving 29 down

:P

As it happens, we were 35-36L anyway so claim has gone in!

 

[swt_passenger]

Have ANY of the major works over the Christmas/New Year period delivered anything like a positive outcome?

Reading viaduct?

 

[ModernRailways]

Have ANY of the major works over the Christmas/New Year period delivered anything like a positive outcome?

More than likely, quite a few. You only hear about the ones that are negative, who cares if the Reading Viaduct was done on time, or a year or two back that Hitchin flyover was done on time (and early IIRC). The only place you will hear about such positive news is on the Network Rail media page and possibly local newspapers may run a small article.

 

[Clip]

I seem to remember they were to "learn lessons" after the Rugby overrun fiasco of a couple of Christmases ago. Are they the same lessons to be learned yet again or somewhat different lessons?

Apparently today, January 5, the London Bridge works, which had helped themselves to well over the "shutting the railway for a week" disdainfully dismissed above, have also had a chaotic ending. Have ANY of the major works over the Christmas/New Year period delivered anything like a positive outcome?

I think that's very harsh. As with all building projects over the world where you are trying to improve/construct something different over current infrastructure you are always going to find issues that raise there head that you cant plan for that you just suddenly find out whilst on site.

I know of one set of extension works going on that the drawings they had didn't even show how much rebar was in the section of concrete they were sutting until they started and found it was bloody everywhere and not in a place where you would expect it to be.

 

[jopsuk]

Have ANY of the major works over the Christmas/New Year period delivered anything like a positive outcome?

At Kings Cross there's now wires connecting properly the ECML and Thameslink... that's a positive.

Remember, whilst it did over run by 24hr, the work did get done.