|
|
Post by railtechnician on Jan 19, 2008 3:24:04 GMT
Well, I think you ought to speak with your DSM at your P&D (or sooner) and ask for a visit up there. Earl's Court does have a reputation for being a bad place, (spread around by managers that are too scared to go in their as there as staff with opinions on how to run a railway, not a branch of MacDonalds,) but it is mostly un-founded. It is a very depressing place to work owing to the building design, layout and noise. Most of the controller's job is last minute owing to the poor information tools available, and the capability of other staff on the line, granted some staff are better than others, but this is the same network wide and there are worse staff overall on other lines! And if we ran the railway according to the train operators, there would never be a train! Speaking as someone who worked many shifts at Earls Court over several years I found it different to the control rooms at Baker Street and Cobourg Street but in most respects neither better nor worse. My experience was that it all depended which shift was on duty and as all over the combine shifts were like chalk and cheese in terms of performance. Mind you the only place I ever saw a full blown row was at Earls Court between a controller and a signalman. The reason for poorer information tools at Earls Court could well be due to the lack of acceptance of new technology by its workforce. Over the years things such as the Plessey telephone system were never installed there, as it was in the other control rooms, because the staff didn't want it. Working practices there were perhaps more unionised than in the other control rooms too. Another problem is that it is a control room working two lines in practice intrinsically linked from a signalling standpoint. One line will never have full control of its service performance as long as it is reliant on such a degree of co-operation from its counterpart. Unfortunately with the estimated cost of relocation of the District Control put at £200+ million some years ago, despite lots of proposals, it could yet be years before a spilt and will require full resignalling of both lines between Earl's Court and Ealing Broadway. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,310
|
Post by Colin on Jan 19, 2008 21:35:34 GMT
And if we ran the railway according to the train operators, there would never be a train! That's an interesting comment - and one that can't go without a response from a train op!!  ;D ;D The majority (there will always be lazy sods) are professional enough to want to get their passengers to the booked destination at all times - at the end of the day, it makes life easier. Unfortunately though, things do sometimes go wrong. If we ask to be turned it's more often than not for a reason; train ops are in the best position to know whether their second train will be stuck in a platform with no relief because they're on a short meal relief, for example. Then there's the rules on driving hours, minimum rest hours, etc - again the train operator is obliged to make it known when these parametres are being exceeded. Now I'm well aware of the counter arguments about the 'bigger picture' and other pressures such as ensuring certain stations get some kind of service to prevent over crowding etc - but, certainly in the case of the District, there's nowhere near enough co-operation from service control. If service control were to allow a bit of teamwork, they may find a more positive attitude from the train ops, and in turn service recovery can only benefit. That's my take from the cab anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Jan 19, 2008 21:47:21 GMT
And if we ran the railway according to the train operators, there would never be a train! That's an interesting comment - and one that can't go without a response from a train op!! ;D ;D The majority (there will always be lazy sods) are professional enough to want to get their passengers to the booked destination at all times - at the end of the day, it makes life easier. Unfortunately though, things do sometimes go wrong. If we ask to be turned it's more often than not for a reason; train ops are in the best position to know whether their second train will be stuck in a platform with no relief because they're on a short meal relief, for example. Then there's the rules on driving hours, minimum rest hours, etc - again the train operator is obliged to make it known when these parametres are being exceeded. Now I'm well aware of the counter arguments about the 'bigger picture' and other pressures such as ensuring certain stations get some kind of service to prevent over crowding etc - but, certainly in the case of the District, there's nowhere near enough co-operation from service control. If service control were to allow a bit of teamwork, they may find a more positive attitude from the train ops, and in turn service recovery can only benefit. That's my take from the cab anyway. I was after a train op colleague comment ;D ;D ;D There are times when the controller will have no idea how late a train is, such as the Picc and District and Met/C&H unless they are told either by a service operator or a train operator, indeed some train ops are happy to stay on their train, either because its a goodun or the minority think, Ah! short meal relief = miss next pick up = less time on front! ;D ;D I think that the one thing that controllers and operators agree on is that when there is an incident, not enough trains are cancelled most likely to boost the mileage figures that make up senipr bods bonuses, which are different to operational and rank and file staff's bonuses . Cancelling trains, frees up line capacity and more imorptantly train operators, so you dont have long sit downs at crew reliefs as there are no train operators, then the blocking back that just makes the problem worse! |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,310
|
Post by Colin on Jan 20, 2008 18:48:53 GMT
See JTD's, we're more alike than you think ;D ;D ;D |
|
;D ;D
