CPA Bulletin

www.cpa.uk.net CPA Bulletin > August 2024 49 RAIL PLANT ASSOCIATION: 2 RPA supports CIRAS campaign RPA is supporting the new campaign from CIRAS confidential safety hotline. Members including AP Webb, ReadyPower, Quattro Plant, and Morgan Sindall are among the companies sharing the message of ‘Make the right call and report your safety concerns’ to staff. The campaign raises awareness of CIRAS alongside other reporting channels, and focuses on more and better listening. It encourages people to find someone who will listen when they have a safety concern to report. Resources to help promote the campaign and encourage reporting are available through https://www.ciras.org.uk/rightcall , along with new videos and other content. And finally... It’s been a great pleasure to have held the post of RPA Chair. I have enjoyed working with you all. Therefore, it is with regret that I must inform you that as of August 31st 2024, I will be stepping away from the role due to other commitments and I wish Andy Crago my full support as the next in coming Chair the very best. The RPA and its members remain fully committed to delivering a first class service to the railway infrastructure managers as always, and I have every confidence that the sector will continually rise to the challenges that the future may hold. Paul Helks Chair of the RPA Management Committee However, risks need to be managed at a holistic level rather than at an individual level otherwise what is achieved is risk displacement rather than risk management. The siloed nature of the railway often means that risks managed by one team create risks for other teams which are sometimes more safety critical than the original risk which has been mitigated. We are seeing that at the moment with the application of the fatigue management standards by Network Rail and their supply chain. The fatigue management standards are not new but the way that they are being applied appears to have changed. Fatigue is one of the key risks in the railway. The Hidden report after the Clapham Junction rail crash, in 1988, highlighted what can happen when people work when they are too tired. The Hidden working time limits were introduced and these have progressively been updated as the science of fatigue management has become better understood. There are now fatigue management models identifying risk scores for individuals so that their planned working rosters can be fine tuned to keep everyone as safe as possible from a fatigue management perspective. And that is all good. However, there are unintended consequences of managing in such a fine tuned way. For maintenance teams, it means that sometimes only 3 shifts per week can be rostered when one of these is a night shift. This is resulting in an increasing maintenance backlog. For renewals teams, it often means delivery plans are built around working 3 x 8 hour shifts rather than 2 x 12 hour shifts. This is great for fatigue management, and allows better shift handovers, but it requires 50% more resources. In an industry with a scarcity of resources, this means that some jobs are being deferred in order to fulfil the resource requirements on other jobs. This is resulting in the average age of railway assets increasing which in turn reduces their reliability and increases the chances of in service failures, disrupting the service provided to passengers and freight customers. The unintended consequences of changing the industry approach to fatigue management is that the maintenance backlog is increasing and the average age of railway assets is increasing. The safety risks have been displaced from individual fatigue to the whole railway asset. Compounding the fatigue management impact on rosters is the impact of the modernising maintenance programme. The reduction in headcount means that the cover for rosters, which used to be there, is no longer there. Further compounding the fatigue management impact is the lack of consideration of resource locations when contracts are awarded sometimes meaning that resources have to travel around 2 hours to get to site. This travelling time has to be considered in the fatigue risk assessments even though it wasn’t considered when the contracts were awarded. Understanding and making risk trade offs is not easy when you control all of the levers and it is even more challenging when the industry works in siloes. From a rail plant perspective, it all adds up to a significant percentage of shifts being cancelled at short notice. Towards the end of CP6, as money was tight, we saw lots of shifts cancelled at short notice. As we moved into CP7, and new funding became available, I had expected the number of short notice cancellations to reduce. Sadly there is no evidence yet that this is the case. Short notice cancellations in themselves introduce safety and efficiency risks to the supply chain and so the risk transference continues. The Rail Plant Association met with Network Rail to ask them to step back and to review both the intended and the unintended consequences of the fatigue management standard, the modernising maintenance programme and the continued high level of short notice cancellations. We will continue to provide input and evidence to Network Rail on behalf of Rail Plant Association members. Steve Featherstone RPA Consultant One of the most important responsibilities when managing a railway is managing risks