• 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!

Health and Safety? (Lymington sacking)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,773
I thik there's more to it than just simply "moving a trolley off the line". Remember, this is a 3rd rail electrified line (even diesel units run on it. they don't switch the power off). Touching a trolley in contact with that 3rd rail would stand a very high chance of being lethal.

There are strict safety rules, even for clearing obstructions (such as trolleys). Clearly he must have not followed those rules, and further, management must have found out- how would be an interesting one.
 

First class

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2008
Messages
2,731
I've actually seen an almost identical situation (3rd rail, luggage on line, single track), where a member of staff went on the track without PTS/HV/contacting signaller etc to retrieve the suitcase. He got asked to write a report, but No Further Actioned, just words of advice.

I'm interested to know how SWT found out though.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,590
Location
Glasgow
I've actually seen an almost identical situation (3rd rail, luggage on line, single track), where a member of staff went on the track without PTS/HV/contacting signaller etc to retrieve the suitcase. He got asked to write a report, but No Further Actioned, just words of advice.

I'm interested to know how SWT found out though.

I suppose there could have been a complaint (from a member of staff or the public) or CCTV footage. SWT have got bad press over this, was there some sort of incident like this on Merseyrail a few years ago?
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
4,923
The Daily Mail (yes I know!!) have an article on it and in that they say he turned off the power before moving the trolley. No idea if that is the truth, or indeed plausable, but it would make sense.
 

Oracle

Established Member
Joined
19 May 2006
Messages
1,410
Location
Near Ashurst New Forest Station
There has been an enormous outcry over this sacking locally! It has been all over BBC Radio Solent. It seems that the 27-year veteran was a well-known and liked personality. He tended the station plants, spent a lot of time working out the cheapest tickets for customers, etc. The hinted suggestion was that ..... Of course the chap has lost his job, hios mortgage protection insurance, and his pension. The local vicar referred to this 'ultimate sanction' as I would put it.

There was an appposite comment made by a telephone caller that if he had done nothing to retrieve the trolley, and a train ran into it, with people injured, he would have been taken to task for doing nothing and wopuld have been labeled a 'jobsworth'. The delays on 7/7 for the ambulance crews to get to the victims because of safety concerns by the police were alluded-to in that connection.

I know the Lymington branch well...I can imagine that if the chap had telephoned Brockenhurst signalbox they could have prevented the train from leaving Brock, or re-set the signal before the Level Crossing. I don't know of any other signals on the line save for that Northbound before the LC and at the junction with the main lines. Are there cab radios on the 450s that work weekends?

The local radio mentioned that someone attended the appeal hearing and the appellant was not allowed to say what had hapened, i.e. speak in his own defence. Hmmm...get a lawyer Sir as if that is the case then this might be an arguable breach of Human Rights legislation.
 
Last edited:

moonrakerz

Member
Joined
10 Feb 2009
Messages
870
As the facts of this appear to be (more than) a bit thin on the ground, it doesn't do much to speculate - however I would just make the comment that I would have thought that someone who has worked for SWT for 27 years would be in a reasonable position to carry out a "risk assessment" on the problem and take whatever action he thought was SAFE and necessary.

As someone who has worked with high voltages most of my working life I know what my "train" of thoughts would have been - and I might well have done what this gentleman did - depending solely on where the trolley was in relation to the live rail.
 

Hydro

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2007
Messages
2,204
The Daily Mail (yes I know!!) have an article on it and in that they say he turned off the power before moving the trolley. No idea if that is the truth, or indeed plausable, but it would make sense.

Eastleigh ECRO would have records of any request for an Emergency Isolation, and logged any isolations granted. I think that ECRO's even log the times circuit breakers are opened and closed. I wouldn't have thought someone with the experience of this chap would have tried to remove a metal obstruction fouling the line without an isolation. That said, if it wasn't near the conductor rail, and didn't look as if it was in danger of coming in contact with it, an isolation probably wouldn't have been necessary, though by the book a line blockage would have been.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,773
I suppose there could have been a complaint (from a member of staff or the public) or CCTV footage. SWT have got bad press over this, was there some sort of incident like this on Merseyrail a few years ago?

I'd have thought it unlikely that anyone would have been actively monitoring CCTV remotely- though CCTV recordings may have been used as evidence.
 

passmore

Member
Joined
21 Mar 2011
Messages
341
Location
Milton Keynes
There has been an enormous outcry over this sacking locally! It has been all over BBC Radio Solent. It seems that the 27-year veteran was a well-known and liked personality. He tended the station plants, spent a lot of time working out the cheapest tickets for customers, etc. The hinted suggestion was that ..... Of course the chap has lost his job, hios mortgage protection insurance, and his pension. The local vicar referred to this 'ultimate sanction' as I would put it.

There was an appposite comment made by a telephone caller that if he had done nothing to retrieve the trolley, and a train ran into it, with people injured, he would have been taken to task for doing nothing and wopuld have been labeled a 'jobsworth'. The delays on 7/7 for the ambulance crews to get to the victims because of safety concerns by the police were alluded-to in that connection.

I know the Lymington branch well...I can imagine that if the chap had telephoned Brockenhurst signalbox they could have prevented the train from leaving Brock, or re-set the signal before the Level Crossing. I don't know of any other signals on the line save for that Northbound before the LC and at the junction with the main lines. Are there cab radios on the 450s that work weekends?

The local radio mentioned that someone attended the appeal hearing and the appellant was not allowed to say what had hapened, i.e. speak in his own defence. Hmmm...get a lawyer Sir as if that is the case then this might be an arguable breach of Human Rights legislation.

Sounds like nothing more than an emotional argument from someone clearly on the side of the 'sacked' employee, based on so little facts as to the circumstances surrounding the sacking.

What is it they say: 'never let facts get in a way of a good rant'...
 

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,753
Location
Essex
Well clearly, there's more to the article than meets the eye. You don't just sack someone from removing a potentially dangerous obstacle on the line, do you?

We don't know what he did. We don't know the facts. Oracle may well be correct. On the other hand, he may not.
 
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
696
I've actually seen an almost identical situation (3rd rail, luggage on line, single track), where a member of staff went on the track without PTS/HV/contacting signaller etc to retrieve the suitcase. He got asked to write a report, but No Further Actioned, just words of advice.

I'm interested to know how SWT found out though.

Because some anally retentive wonderkid who's had three weeks on the job and is therefore an expert saw something that doesn't usually happen and immediately assumed that it was dangerous.
Common sense - you're 'aving a larf!
 

Hydro

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2007
Messages
2,204
Because some anally retentive wonderkid who's had three weeks on the job and is therefore an expert saw something that doesn't usually happen and immediately assumed that it was dangerous.
Common sense - you're 'aving a larf!


Like it or not, there are rules to abide by no matter how silly some sound. It's the game you have to play. Just tick the boxes, follow the rules and put up with it until such a day comes that maybe new management revamps them. If you go against the laid down rules, then you run the risk of disciplinary procedures.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,773
even if he did nip onto the track without clearance, I can't help but feel that there must be more beyond that- if he's been sacked (rather than given a warning) I can't help but suspect that he's tried to deny what he did, or even tried to cover up/asked someone to help cover up etc.
 

Bon Accord

Member
Joined
14 Apr 2011
Messages
111
Location
61B
Like it or not, there are rules to abide by no matter how silly some sound. It's the game you have to play.

An attitude which is a major part of 'the problem' - the average Brit is just too lazy to protest enough/at all at the ever more ludicrous and petty rules and regulations we're subjected to.
Management then play their part by correspondingly treating everyone like a child who is incapable of doing up their own shoelaces without a task risk assessment, method statement, permit to work and full PPE.

Just tick the boxes, follow the rules and put up with it until such a day comes that maybe new management revamps them. .

With the vast majority of companies and public bodies out there, then you're in for a VERY long wait.
Since HSE regulations are treated with an almost biblical (but obviously non denominational) reverence by office bound, unaffected pen pushing wallahs, then it is very rare indeed for such regulations to be 'repealed'.
The best any of us can hope for is to maintain the current status quo and hope the spiral of ridiculousness stops, alas that never tends to happen.
 

moonrakerz

Member
Joined
10 Feb 2009
Messages
870
Since HSE regulations are treated with an almost biblical (but obviously non denominational) reverence by office bound, unaffected pen pushing wallahs, then it is very rare indeed for such regulations to be 'repealed'.

The problem is that most of these "HSE regulations" do not exist !
They are, more often than not, a completely erroneous interpretation applied by "office bound, unaffected pen pushing wallahs" who have never done any proper H & S training in their life..............
 

Hydro

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2007
Messages
2,204
An attitude which is a major part of 'the problem'


Well, I'll just buck the system at work and possibly end up like the poor fellow at Lymo then. Rules and procedures are contested and changed all the time. The unfortunate fact of the matter is, whilst they are being enforced you abide by them until such time as they are amended or repealed. You must accept any risk if you choose to bend or break them.


I like my job, and I'd like to keep it. You won't hear about rules being relaxed, because they don't translate into stories like the one above. Even then, when a procedure is changed from being less restrictive, there's a chance the unions will jump on it as "affecting employee safety", (T3 changes? B3 isolations on the Southern? Changes to the former T2H method of protection?).

I'm in the camp with those who think that the whole story is not known from the news article.
 

bluenoxid

Established Member
Joined
9 Feb 2008
Messages
2,471
Because some anally retentive wonderkid who's had three weeks on the job and is therefore an expert saw something that doesn't usually happen and immediately assumed that it was dangerous.
Common sense - you're 'aving a larf!

You'd laugh. I've had the opposite happen recently happen in my workplace. :lol:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
An attitude which is a major part of 'the problem' - the average Brit is just too lazy to protest enough/at all at the ever more ludicrous and petty rules and regulations we're subjected to.
Management then play their part by correspondingly treating everyone like a child who is incapable of doing up their own shoelaces without a task risk assessment, method statement, permit to work and full PPE.



With the vast majority of companies and public bodies out there, then you're in for a VERY long wait.
Since HSE regulations are treated with an almost biblical (but obviously non denominational) reverence by office bound, unaffected pen pushing wallahs, then it is very rare indeed for such regulations to be 'repealed'.
The best any of us can hope for is to maintain the current status quo and hope the spiral of ridiculousness stops, alas that never tends to happen.

If you had a look at the Health and Safety regulations that have been created they demand a traceable method to show that you have undertaken the training, competence and safety procedures. Unfortunately, the HSE show no remorse in court when you shrug your shoulders. Health and Safety is prosecuted on an assumption of guilt of the charge not innocent until proven guilty.

However, this is not to say that some rules are stupid. The banning of ladders in many places of work has created several stupid risks as MEWP's and scaffolding are brought into places which are not suited for them just to get at a light that is only 8 feet off the floor.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
Daily Mail Comment: Go read the article again. He removed the trolley BEFORE the station opened so there was no risk to any trains. Also, trains are equipped with telephones so he could easily have phoned the first train and advised the driver of the obstruction. There are also signals which take a few seconds to switch to red to stop any trains that might have hit the trolley. Once any further risk had been avoided, he could then have taken safe measures to have the trolley removed by the proper people. Instead he took the gung-ho approach and put his own life at risk completely unnecessarily. Sacking him may have been excessive but there was a definite need for disciplinary measure to be taken.

Don't you just wish you could reach into your monitor and throttle people!:mad::roll:
 

Firestarter

Member
Joined
15 Sep 2009
Messages
544
If a baby or child fell onto the track and he/member of staff went down to get them off the line would he been still sacked for breaching H&S? The truth is SWT didn't want to pay his pension.
 

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,753
Location
Essex
If a baby or child fell onto the track and he/member of staff went down to get them off the line would he been still sacked for breaching H&S? The truth is SWT didn't want to pay his pension.

Is that "truth" based on fact? Didn't think so.
 

Bon Accord

Member
Joined
14 Apr 2011
Messages
111
Location
61B
In the literal sense it probably is fact, I doubt ANY Toc actually wants to pay pensions, or indeed pay their employees anything at all. All that whilst still expecting undying loyalty in return of course...
 

33011

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2008
Messages
297
I wonder if there is more to this than stated. The unions have no strikes planned which they normally do if there are any wrong doings.
 

allticketspls

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2011
Messages
174
Location
Enfield, Middlesex
When I did my induction before starting my current post, and indeed with other TOCS, the question of what to do if there is an obstruction/person on the tracks came up.

The official reply on every occasion I have had this discussion is that only PTS qualified staff are allowed onto the tracks. Non safety critical staff are supposed to contact the signalman and inform him of the situation and ask for the signals to be changed/power turned off. When this is done a PTS holder will then access the tracks and deal with the incident.

I know that in real life the obvious thing to do is to jump down yourself and do it but you are potentially becoming a casualty yourself and therefore in breach of most TOC's health and safety policies.

I have been told categorically that people who are non PTS holders who access the tracks for ANY reason will be immediately dismissed and may also face charges.

I know that the story featured is missing some details but it looks like this is the reason the gentleman was dismissed on Health & Safety grounds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top