Shortage of train crews on Great Western Railway since September 2017 - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

One TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) gave their drivers 28% over several years.....do you support going that far?

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

It’s not just the money.  Anyone in any job likes to feel valued, respected, treated reasonably etc.  I know plenty of people who have moved to a lower paid job and been happier for it because of the job satisfaction they get which they didn’t get before. 

You don’t necessarily need money to reduce turnover, just good management (again, in the broadest sense) to help retain staff who you may lose if you don’t treat them right.

[TaplowGreen]

If the current shortage is due to a higher than expected turnover I would expect HR^▸ (Human Resources) to know the reason why and to address it.  Ditto if absence due to sickness is higher than expected.  Incidentally, I don’t buy this fake sickness suggestion.

Others have reported that RD and overtime payments have been reduced.  This is not the best strategy if you know you’re short (or going to be short) of Drivers and need to rely on RD and overtime working to keep the service going.  Drivers are a TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)’s most important resource and they need to be managed (in the broadest sense) effectively.

But then in my day there were experienced Employee Relations people.

Most progressive organisations regard customers as on a par with staff as their most important resource.

But then in the real world there's competition.

[IndustryInsider]

I'm not sure many passengers would be happy being described as a resource?

[TaplowGreen]

I'm not sure many passengers would be happy being described as a resource?

I appreciate that regarding your customers as an asset to be treated accordingly is utterly alien to the railways, and therefore I get why the concept has gone straight over your head.

[a-driver]

GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) have recruited drivers in there hundreds, I would estimate in the region of 500 drivers in the past two or three years and that doesn’t include the recruiting of already qualified drivers but as quickly as they pass out new drivers others are leaving the company.

Quite a significant number of which do not live locally, or have moved themselves down here into rented accommodation leaving family at whatever distant town 'home' may be.  Unsurprisingly at the first opportunity they get a job with a TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) close to wherever home is.  Is it really beyond the wit of GWR to find people who are local? (cue League of Gentlemen impressions!).

At Paddington, a lot of drivers are  considered to be local.  I can’t remember many coming from outside London. Since I left I’ve seen ex-GWR drivers walking around in TfL^» (Transport for London - about) uniforms and working for other London TOC’s. I don’t know about Oxford and Reading but, like London, they aren’t cheap places to move to and rent.  I guess if they haven’t got the number of local applicants to apply then there’s not much option.
I remember 3 years ago at Padd we had drivers worrying about job security because they considered the company to be recruiting far too many new drivers, now look at it!  

[IndustryInsider]

I'm not sure many passengers would be happy being described as a resource?

I appreciate that regarding your customers as an asset to be treated accordingly is utterly alien to the railways, and therefore I get why the concept has gone straight over your head.

Resource to me means something to be used.  Seems to be the dictionary definition as well?  Asset is a much better word.

[IndustryInsider]

I guess if they haven’t got the number of local applicants to apply then there’s not much option.

I think that's the problem - local advertising is not being done effectively.  Appreciating that London is very different, I don't believe that there's not a pool of people living in Reading or Oxford or the surrounding villages that would make excellent train drivers and be more than happy to do the job if some kind of appropriate weighting was given living local to the depot during the application process. 

Would that fall foul of employment law?  As a business you could argue that people who live close to the depot are likely to be more punctual and be able to get to work when the weather is bad as well as more likely to stay.

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

I'm not sure many passengers would be happy being described as a resource?

I appreciate that regarding your customers as an asset to be treated accordingly is utterly alien to the railways, and therefore I get why the concept has gone straight over your head.

A company’s resources may include many things, eg land, capital, plant, equipment, expertise, people (ie human resources, a horrible modern term) etc.

However, customers are most definitely NOT a resource.   How a company treats its customers is a completely different issue.

[lbraine]

At the risk of being knee jerk reactive (and coming across as Mr Angry) - the first full work day of the new ‘improved’ timetable in the TV was a shambles,  especially through the rush hours.

Both trains I aimed for (in and out) of Reading were cancelled with others on the board in a similar state.

What is the point of FGW^▸ (First Great Western) publishing a timetable they clearly cannot honour - whether the reasons be infrastructure issues, stock defects or the much discussed lack of drivers.

What should have been a positive experience day (perhaps negating some of the sticker shock of the new fare increases) was in fact firmly negative. Like most commuters I have waited pateniently through the massive amount of disruptions to the Paddington lines over the last 4 years - understanding that there was many hard yards to be experienced before something better would emerge.

Today was a joke. I’m expecting it to descend into farce as short-comings become more effident and continual.

I have attached the list of 35 cancellations listed from 5pm on Journey check around ( in the main) Reading. Most due to ‘lack of driver’.

[IndustryInsider]

Indeed, a pathetic first day.

[a-driver]

Is it a simple lack of drivers or it is a lack of trained drivers (route briefings/traction training)?

I’m guessing it’s a shortage of 387 trained drivers. Now electrification extends to Didcot and there’s more 387’s running perhaps now they’ve got more services on which drivers can be trained on.

Edit:  I see some services are now being reinstated.

[TaplowGreen]

I'm not sure many passengers would be happy being described as a resource?

I appreciate that regarding your customers as an asset to be treated accordingly is utterly alien to the railways, and therefore I get why the concept has gone straight over your head.

Resource to me means something to be used.  Seems to be the dictionary definition as well?  Asset is a much better word.

An asset is a resource with economic value.....this particular asset is on a 2 car Turbo  (usually 8 car Electric) stopper packed beyond belief before it's even left Paddington.

[Sixty3Closure]

My original query wasn't so much about the lack of drivers but GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) knowing that they had a shortage today (and other days). Putting that to one side (for a moment anyway) did they really only realise they couldn't cover shifts a couple of hours ago?

As someone who has had to rota staff in the past I look at what I have for the day and then give teams affected by lack of 'resource' as much notice as possible. Am I missing something in not assuming that GWR would have known at 8am today or yesterday what trains they could run allowing for a small notice of short notice changes?

[IndustryInsider]

They would have certainly had a fair idea, though a lot of juggling goes on during the day to try and minimise shortages.