
31 October 2017
RMT Press Office:
RMT calls on rail regulator to intervene to stop safety breaches in next phase of Greater Anglia strike action.
RAIL UNION RMT has today written to the rail safety regulator, the Office of Road and Rail, demanding that they take urgent action to prevent a replay of the serious safety breaches that the union uncovered, and which were backed up by the ORR’s own investigations, during the last phase of strike action on Abellio Greater Anglia.
In the letter to Ian Prosser, the Chief Inspector of Railways, RMT General Secretary Mick Cash says:
Despite your inspectors identifying deficiencies within Greater Anglia’s contingency arrangements, with another set of strike dates looming, let me assure you that RMT are not in the least bit convinced that anything has or is going to change for the 8th and 9th of November. I will remind you of the areas you disclosed to me in your letter of the 16th October: Planning Procedures, Risk Assessments, Training & Safety Validation all identified with deficiencies and an assurance that those deficiencies would be rectified to meet your regulatory standards, I have to ask what has changed?
• “The conductors used on RMT strike days received the same standard of safety training as our usual conductors”. This would appear to be false. At best this statement is misleading given that full conductor training is measured in months and not hours. We also believe there has been a failing at ORR. We understand that the truncated training provided to contingency guards has not included route learning during the hours of darkness which is currently required for guards. With the clocks due to go back an hour this coming weekend this will become more necessary.
• “Our stand in conductors have been fully trained and had to pass safety, competency and medical tests. They safely operated over 500 services on Tuesday”. I would question the accuracy of this statement given that we have evidence of 7 train dispatch irregularities, 6 incidents of conductor error, 3 of conductor knowledge and one of doors opened wrong-side, all of which occurred on the first day of the strike. [please see attached spreadsheet]. RMT have been unable to verify what happened on the second day of the dispute because our accredited safety representatives have been locked out of the company incident log.
• “We will never compromise the safety of our customers”. This is in contrast to ORR’s letter to RMT in which you found “deficiencies that need to be addressed, including: planning procedures; risk assessment, training and safety validation.”
I have no evidence of any further training that has been given to persons utilized as guards since the last dispute and the company seem to be carrying on regardless with an attempt to run services at any cost to passenger and staff safety.
RMT have real concerns that during the next dispute one of these staff will make a critical error that will lead to the physical injury or worse still the loss of life of a passenger or other member of staff I am asking ORR to intervene ahead of the dispute to stop these foreseeable outcomes.
RMT has also warned the ORR that it’s independent status is firmly on the line if it fails to act on the union’s concerns and their own findings:
Much is trumpeted by both the ORR and the Government of how independent you are from the railway industry – the same industry that contributes a large part of your funding.
I regretfully have to say that your apparent strategy of “waiting until the horse has bolted” really does bring into question that independence particularly as we are aware that the Department of Transport would also seem to be overseeing the contingency arrangements for this industrial action. We note that the Department of Transport often quotes the ORR when supporting its position on DOO and appoints the directors to the ORR board.
Mick Cash, RMT General Secretary, said:
“It would be scandalous if Abellio Greater Anglia were allowed to crash on next week with the same operational model that was identified as clearly deficient by the safety regulator during the last phase of strike action. Abellio Greater Anglia were caught red handed putting the travelling public at risk in a desperate effort to break the strike and there must be no repeat of this cavalier attitude to passenger safety next week.
“Instead of playing fast and loose with safety Greater Anglia should be sitting down with the union to negotiate a settlement to this dispute which guarantees the safety-critical role of the guard and which puts the well-being of passengers before the profits of this Dutch state-owned company.”
ENDS
Note;
Dear Ian
GREATER ANGLIA DISPUTE – REPLACEMENT LABOUR
Thank you for your letter of 26th October 2017.
Greater Anglia have gone on record regarding their attempts to run train services at any cost during our recent industrial dispute.
Despite your inspectors identifying deficiencies within Greater Anglia’s contingency arrangements, with another set of strike dates looming, let me assure you that RMT are not in the least bit convinced that anything has or is going to change for the 8th and 9th of November. I will remind you of the areas you disclosed to me in your letter of the 16th October: Planning Procedures, Risk Assessments, Training & Safety Validation all identified with deficiencies and an assurance that those deficiencies would be rectified to meet your regulatory standards, I have to ask what has changed?
• “The conductors used on RMT strike days received the same standard of safety training as our usual conductors”. This would appear to be false. At best this statement is misleading given that full conductor training is measured in months and not hours. We also believe there has been a failing at ORR. We understand that the truncated training provided to contingency guards has not included route learning during the hours of darkness which is currently required for guards. With the clocks due to go back an hour this coming weekend this will become more necessary.
• “Our stand in conductors have been fully trained and had to pass safety, competency and medical tests. They safely operated over 500 services on Tuesday”. I would question the accuracy of this statement given that we have evidence of 7 train dispatch irregularities, 6 incidents of conductor error, 3 of conductor knowledge and one of doors opened wrong-side, all of which occurred on the first day of the strike. [please see attached spreadsheet]. RMT have been unable to verify what happened on the second day of the dispute because our accredited safety representatives have been locked out of the company incident log.
• “We will never compromise the safety of our customers”. This is in contrast to ORR’s letter to RMT in which you found “deficiencies that need to be addressed, including: planning procedures; risk assessment, training and safety validation.”
I have no evidence of any further training that has been given to persons utilized as guards since the last dispute and the company seem to be carrying on regardless with an attempt to run services at any cost to passenger and staff safety.
RMT have real concerns that during the next dispute one of these staff will make a critical error that will lead to the physical injury or worse still the loss of life of a passenger or other member of staff I am asking ORR to intervene ahead of the dispute to stop these foreseeable outcomes.
Much is trumpeted by both the ORR and the Government of how independent you are from the railway industry – the same industry that contributes a large part of your funding.
I regretfully have to say that your apparent strategy of “waiting until the horse has bolted” really does bring into question that independence particularly as we are aware that the Department of Transport would also seem to be overseeing the contingency arrangements for this industrial action. We note that the Department of Transport often quotes the ORR when supporting its position on DOO and appoints the directors to the ORR board.
I look forward to your early response.
Yours sincerely
Mick Cash
General Secretary