|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Oct 16, 2017 17:39:22 GMT
The programme completion date for the life-extension work being carried on the Bakerloo line fleet appears to have ben pushed back to April 2019 from the accelerated date of November 2018 due to “a significant number” of vital employees that have left TfL as a result of IR35 changes, revised tax legislation affecting public sector contractors.
The initial target to complete Bakerloo Line stock improvements was originally April 2020, but that was then revised to November 2018 when it was decided to ramp up works two trains at a time.
These are the effects of a determined move away from workers who operate through personal service companies in the name of "efficiency savings" to reduce reliance on agency staff.
But part of me worries that if contingency plans are not properly followed through this could result in a deprivation of talent in key areas, with the potential to cause setbacks to other engineering projects where stakes are higher and that brings more intense/less forgiving public scrutiny.
Your thoughts and opinions on this would be most welcome.
G.Arrow
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2017 18:55:59 GMT
I bet you that TFL regret (behind the scenes) in not proceeding with the 2013 proposed order for replacement bakerloo trains - It would have worked out far cheaper over a whole life cost of the new trains (and no farting around with IR35 and all that nonsense).
|
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Oct 17, 2017 6:50:35 GMT
kkc3548 I don't recall any plan for new Bakerloo trains in 2013 that could have avoided the need for the extensive structural works that are being carried out.
The IR35 issue caused problems all over LU in areas where temporary workers are the norm - typically project departments where there is a peaky demand for the resource; most LU project departments and the IT department were most affected.
|
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Oct 17, 2017 6:57:44 GMT
kkc3548 I don't recall any plan for new Bakerloo trains in 2013 that could have avoided the need for the extensive structural works that are being carried out. The IR35 issue caused problems all over LU in areas where temporary workers are the norm - typically project departments where there is a peaky demand for the resource; most LU project departments and the IT department were most affected. @kkc35348, I don't recall hearing about this either. It would be really useful if you could link to your information source so we can all read it. |
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Oct 17, 2017 9:20:26 GMT
Not sure wether this is entirely relevant, but 2013 was the year that Seimens launched their concept design for their, "Inspiro", design for the deep level tube lines. This was a year after Network Rail published their Route Utilisation Strategy for London and the South East. Lewisham council said at the time that, "There is a good to strong, but not overwhelming case for a Bakerloo line extension", citing the fact that more significant projects had been given priority i.e. The Thameslink Programme. Not sure how this ties anything together but Il leave the link to the article on the 2013 concept design. www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/siemens-unveils-proposal-for-future-london-underground-train.html |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2017 21:30:17 GMT
Yep, that's the link, as the Bakerloo Line trains were "crumbling" in effect, it was NOT unreasonable to procure some new trains, as a Smaller Batch could have been built for the Bakerloo, any new issues ironed out, before any main production run for the Piccadilly/Central lines got going. p.s. did they find out what caused the small fire at Oxford Circus, was it due the some ancient component(s) breaking down perhaps???
|
|
