Opinion
W
e in the signalling grades are looking over our shoulders as major changes loom. Almost like the
Industrial Revolution in reverse with fewer and fewer people needed as 14 Regional Operating Centres (ROC's) are built and hundreds of signal boxes, signalling centres, and even modern IECC's, close - with their functions migrating over a lengthy period to the ROC's.
The impact on jobs and signallers is massive with the overall number of signallers dropping from 6000 to around 1500 - a huge personnel issue for Network Rail. Some signallers will be accommodated in the ROC's, some will be found jobs elsewhere and redundancy terms will be made available to others as this huge 75 per cent cut in staffing levels takes place. NR, at least, has time to get this right - as right as it can be bearing in mind the upheaval to the staff concerned. And this has already commenced for some people.
Too huge?
All this dwarfs what happened in past years as signalling centres took over from smaller signal boxes and the days of a box at the end of every platform are long gone. Concerns about the ROC's are already being aired regarding the huge areas they will control, and this was illustrated some months ago when Three Bridges signalling centre in Sussex was evacuated due to a fire alarm with a massive impact on train services. RMT's Bob Crow rightly raised the issue of what might result if something similar happens at a ROC. As things stand - could we be looking at someone in the ROC at Derby managing the train service at East Croydon if Three Bridges ROC goes out of commission? What about out on the railway? All very well having new control centres but will the trackside technology be updated too? Or are there boffins out there looking at the inevitable - extending in-cab signalling followed by driverless trains. Of course there are. Soldier on with what we have with the ROC's bedding in over a period of 30 years or so - and work on basically cutting yet more jobs as automation takes over more railway functions? Of course they will. New technology will take over in the ROC's as levers, bells and NX panels gradually fade into history to be replaced by computerised work stations. But while
the very basic principles will remain the same trackside - those boffins will look hard at how to squeeze more trains into an infrastructure that still hasn't had the expansion it needs to cater for the huge increase in traffic.
Things have moved on in recent years with enhancements to AWS and the introduction of TPWS which takes much of the sting out of Signals Passed at Danger incidents. At work, colleagues and I still shake our heads at the apparent lack of a Spanish TPWS equivalent that might have prevented that recent derailment where overspeed played a decisive part. But generally speaking, rail is as safe a mode of transport as you will get and will surely continue to be so as ROC's take over.
Those boffins (again) have long looked at Automatic Route Setting. As things stand, us signallers don't do a bad job in that respect, especially in the busier
locations where 70-80 and more trains an hour are common place with all the regulating that is entailed. But ARS will eventually win the day.
Potential for more degraded work We really earn our money when things go wrong with our S&T and PWay staff out on track and trains having to be routed around them (where possible), or talked past signals at danger, while they repair faults and carry out maintenance, safely. Safe operation of the railway is a principle that will never change but will ROC's see signallers having to deal with larger areas with a consequent potential for more degraded working as we call it? While there are many unanswered questions, at least we don't have the prospect to look forward to of our functions being 'outsourced' to India - do we?
Anonymous October 2013 Page 55
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140