RISK, ASSET & DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT
of a safety management system for infra- structure managers and for railway under- takings – train operators.
“That’s what should be in the SMS. The RM3 tool is really a way of assessing whether that is delivering practical safety on the ground, and likely to do that reli- ably. That’s the essence of maturity; not just ‘do you have a bit of paper’ and ‘are you putting it into practice’, but do the un- derlying management arrangements help ensure you’ll achieve what you want to achieve reliably?
“Even the best performing companies can still have things go wrong. But if they’ve got an effective, mature management system, that’s far less likely to happen.”
Although it is ORR’s role in regulating in- dustry performance that has made more headlines in recent weeks, it is of course also the health and safety regulator.
Spence explained: “There are two distinct ways in which we can regulate, or help to improve, the industry. One of them is the licence, but actually that’s not primarily a safety tool, so the way we regulate safety is through the conventional health and safety legislation that applies in any industry. There’s one or two bits of rail specific stuff, ROGS being one example, but by and large this is generic health and safety law. That’s the underpinning legislative framework. We use improvement notices, prohibi- tion notices, prosecution, advice: all of the same things that, for example, the Health & Safety Executive would use dealing with a chemical plant.
“Those are the tools. But as the regulator, we don’t just sit back and wait for things to go wrong and use those enforcement tools. We actually spend the greatest proportion of our time trying to test the effectiveness of the arrangements that the companies have in place.
“That isn’t just an adversarial, ‘we’re the big boys with a warrant’, operation: it’s about working collaboratively with the in- dustry to help them to improve, identify where their weak spots are, and what needs to change.
“That’s what we do through our inspection programme. We get with the company, talk to them about what it is we and they think are the priorities: we work through those with them.
“We’re not in any way compromised. One of our advantages is that we can tell it like it is. We’ve not got to manage messages in-
ternally, but we certainly try to do that col- laboratively with the company, not as an ‘us and them’ approach.
Efficiencies
Unit costs in the rail industry are much too high: that’s long been known, and the Mc- Nulty review spelt it out. Safety manage- ment can actually play its part in bringing costs down, Spence says.
He explained: “There are two ways you can improve safety. You can throw money at it, and you can make short-term benefits. Or, if you get the management system maturity right, if you get the arrangements working efficiently, you deliver sustainable, high safety standards – and do that at lower cost.
“So, if we can get the industry – and this is why we put so much emphasis on management maturity – to focus on that long-term goal of having these arrangements in place that are both efficient and safe, we end up with a lower cost and higher safety performance.”
Standard complaint
Everyone knows the industry is burdened with well-intentioned standards, which range from the vital to the counter-productive.
Spence said: “That is one of the things we’re actively talking about with Network Rail and other duty holders: making sure that people aren’t just doing things because a standard says so. Sometimes, doing so won’t be enough to meet health and safety duties and properly protect safety, while sometimes, it may be over the top.
“We’re trying to push the industry towards risk-based controls, with competent peo- ple taking sensible decisions – not a slavish adherence to long-established standards that may or may not still be relevant to to- day’s railway.
“For that reason, Network Rail are going through their standards at the moment, and it’s been talked about and piloted, a process of deciding what ‘must’ be done, what might you be able to get some sort of derogation from, and what frankly is just advice.
“That ‘red, amber, green’ approach to their standards is something they’re actively go- ing through to make sure competent peo- ple on the ground, operating in the right management system, are taking sensible decisions and doing the right things, not just doing what standards have said since Adam was a lad.”
Upheaval
Although you wouldn’t believe it to look at some of the rolling stock and signalling systems still in use on the UK rail network, it really is an ever-changing beast, and managing risk through a time of upheaval is an extra challenge. This can be both on the infrastructure side – such as Network Rail’s devolution of power and budgets to its routes – and the operator side, with re-franchising and franchising reform, to name just a few topical examples.
Spence acknowledged: “Risks increase
during time of change. Hence, one of the most important components of a safety management system is effective change management.
“An awful lot of our inspectors’ time is put into scrutinising how the companies are managing change, and whether that was the reduction in staffing and restructuring of maintenance in Network Rail, known as Phase 2BC, or the move to devolution, or franchise change for train operators, wher- ever that change might be, we take an in- terest. We check their safety management is working effectively, through that proper change management, and where we have concerns, we increase the amount of in- spection we do to test that it has happened in practice.
“One of the most significant changes, de- scribed as the biggest in the railway in- dustry in a generation, was Network Rail’s maintenance restructuring. So we’ve spent a considerable amount of our time testing how that’s worked on the ground. Very re- cently, Network Rail has told us that in the light of one of the key components of that change management – post-implementa- tion review – they have realised they need to move some resource around, and put back in some resource.
“When a change is made, it’s important that companies periodically and frequently check it’s worked properly and make any changes that might be necessary. Network Rail is doing that at the moment in light of the things we’ve highlighted, and from things they’ve found out themselves.”
Spence concluded: “It’s not about ORR managing
risk; it’s
about those who hold the duty in the industry managing that risk.”
Allan Spence
FOR MORE INFORMATION Visit
www.rail-reg.gov.uk
rail technology magazine Dec/Jan 12 | 51
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