(a) Risk Assessment
My understanding of how the Risk Assessment was conducted was that a group of Connex Managers met at a hotel in Tonbridge and drafted one. Neither myself nor any of the other Health & Safety Representatives to my knowledge have ever been shown it. We understood that the Risk Assessment dealt with previous shift patterns rather than future shift patterns but due to the fact that I have never seen it, I can only speculate as to its contents. Not only did I request a copy of the assessment from the Managing Director but I have also requested it from local Managers on numerous previous occasions. On 23 December 1997 I met with the Production Manager, Mr Goff and the Safety Standards Manager, Mr O'Neill and again requested a copy of the Risk Assessment. My request was refused.
(b) To take account of the views and experiences of effected staff.
The Health & Safety Representatives were not consulted about this Risk Assessment. The only consultation that took place was through the Drivers Functional Council who were members of ASLEF. However, none of the drivers were Health & Safety Representatives nor were they trained in health and safety issues and I would be surprised if they were aware of the Safety Critical Regulations.
(c) Monitoring of the changes
This did not occur.
(d) Measures to counteract fatigue
If a driver were to ask for relief due to fatigue, the Local Drivers Standards Manager would record it in a book. As far as I am concerned, that was the extent of measures put in place. Fatigue was never counteracted at all. In fact the effect of having a formal record of these complaints was that drivers would be concerned about raising the issue in case it was in some way to be used against them subsequently. Speaking only anecdotally my view as that incidents of fatigue were quite rare prior to restructuring. Following restructuring I received a huge number of verbal complaints from drivers who felt more and more tired. None of these drivers would have been prepared to put this into writing although I do have two written reports from drivers and indeed I submitted one myself.
(e) Inadequacy of rest periods
All I can say is that the period of breaks after restructuring made fatigue more likely.
(f) Requirement for the Induction of gradual changes
This did not occur. A change in the shift patterns occurred overnight in June 1997.
(g) Consideration of reverting to previous shift patterns.
In reality the way the package had been agreed with the industry was such that this was never going to happen. Everyone was telling Connex that drivers restructuring was endangering safety but I am not aware that they ever considered reverting to the previous system. I would refer to the following matters all of which should have brought this to the attention of Connex:
(i) HMRI Survey of 1997.
This Survey was unprecedented and the conclusion that it reached was critical of the restructuring arrangements. The survey results were only circulated to Health and Safety Representatives. An earlier report by Dr Lucas of the Health and Safety Executive's Health Directorate was very critical of a number of aspects of Connex's approach.
(ii) Circadian Technologies Report
Circadian Technologies carried out a survey for Thameslink and other train operating companies into drivers hours. They were commissioned by Connex South Eastern to do one for them after the Railways Inspectorate suggested that one should be undertaken. This took place at the end of 1997. The Health & Safety Representatives were never consulted. I understand that the general results of the Circadian Technologies Survey and a number of other surveys that were reviewed appeared in a Sunday Times article in the context of the rail industry overall. Circadian Technologies made certain proposals but I have never seen the Report and it was never circulated. I do not know what the proposals were and I have requested a copy of this Report on numerous occasions. To date it has never been disclosed to me or made public.
(iii) Halcrow Transmark
This Report was commissioned by Connex after the Circadian Technologies Survey and presumably because Connex did not like the Report that they received. Halcrow Transmark relied upon data provided by Connex which to my mind was flawed and again virtually no consultation with the drivers or their representatives took place.
(iv) Loss Control Reports
When a signal is passed at danger, the driver is required to complete a report of the incident. He would then sit down with a Driver Standards Manager to complete a more detailed document. The DSM would insert his own conclusions and this Report would then be submitted to the Safety Standards Department at Head Office.
As Health & Safety Representative I would only get to see the overall summation by the DSM in the Lost Control Report. Even then we would only receive them intermittently. In 1998, I barely received any Lost Control Reports and I would constantly have to pester Management for them. It was my view that this monitoring system was inadequate because the Representative would only get the gloss put on the incident by the Driver Standards Manager rather than the explanation by the driver himself.
I carried out my own survey on Lost Control Reports from June 1997 to the end of 1998 in the Metro area. I found that out of the signals passed at danger that occurred 11 out of approximately 20 could be attributed in the main part to tiredness or fatigue brought on as a result of drivers restructuring. This survey featured in my report to Her Majesty's Railways Inspectorate in January 1999. | |
66. The way that shift patterns worked after restructuring was that drivers would work a week of morning starts and a week of afternoon starts. The maximum number of hours that a driver could be required to work was 11 but this may not include travelling back to the drivers own depot. The minimum hours I believe was 6. If a driver worked 6 hours he would not be entitled to a rest break. Sundays were no longer optional and rest breaks were no longer obliged to be taken between the third and sixth hour of a shift.
14 May 1997 | Migraine |
14-15 June 1997 | 2 days off suffering with stress |
22 July 1997 | Stage 1 Letter and Meeting with Foreman under the Managing for Attendance Procedure |
20-21 August 1997 | Fatigue. I had been up at 3.45 am for most of that week on a shift of earlies getting home at 4.40 pm extremely tired and making mistakes at work. I needed some rest. |
24-29 August 1997 | I was diagnosed by my GP with Labyrinthitus which was an ear infection affecting my balance. I was put on a drug course which meant that I was unable to be in charge of a train during that time. |
4 October 1997 | Migraine after the inhalation of environmental tobacco smoke at work. |
16-17 November 1997 | Fatigue and tiredness. I was leaving my home at 9.40 am, getting back home at 10.50 pm. With eating and sleeping I had no spare time and found that I was making a number of mistakes at work. |
14 February 98 | Admitted to hospital after inhaling environmental tobacco smoke at work |
18-19 February 1998 | Fatigue. I was up at 2.20 am to be home at 2.45 pm. |
3-4 April 1998 | Fatigue. I was up at 2.20 am getting home at 3.20 pm. |
18-19 May 1998 | Migraine. |
9 June 1998 | Stage 2 Interview under the Management for Attendance Procedure with Line Manager. I was concerned about how this interview may go and decided to record the conversation. During this interview I pointed out the problems that I was experiencing with fatigue and that I wasn't being given any time off by Connex to carry out my Health & Safety Representatives duties. Consequently, I was doing much of this work in my spare time and often working late into the night. I pointed out that this was a breach of the Health & Safety Regulations to the Manager. His response to me was that I should just get more sleep |
24-25 July 1998 | Fatigue. I was up at 6.00 am and working until 4.30 pm, getting home at 5.20 pm. |
20-21 September 98 | Fatigue for the 5 days previously, I had worked getting up at 2.30 am, booking on at Charing Cross at 5.19 am and booking off at 2.18 pm, arriving home at 3.20 pm. After 5 days of those shifts I was suffering from fatigue and took two days off. |
27 October 1998 | I had a Stage 3 Meeting under the Managing for Attendance Procedure with Local Manager Gollop. On that particular day I was shattered having got up at 3.30 am and worked the first part of my shift. The meeting itself did not start until 1.00 pm when we went through the sickness that I had taken. We also went through two days when I had booked on late. I had an Observer at that meeting and I was put on a Final Warning which meant that if I had any sickness at all within the next 12 month period I would have been sacked pending appeal. The problem then was that I was on this Final Warning and daren't take any time off sick. Both myself and a number of other drivers would then come in on a number of occasions when we were simply unfit to drive trains because we had no alternative. An example of this was an incident at Albany Park on 29 November 1998. I was on my last trip down to Dartford towards the end of a long duty. I was completely exhausted and braked fractionally too late. The sharp braking was compounded by a problem with wheel adhesion and the train slipped past the platform by one coach. The wheel slip protection cut in and overrode my braking system. I had to report this incident to the Driver Standards Manager at London Bridge and was interviewed by him afterwards and had to provide a urine sample. I mentioned at this meeting that I was exhausted and I complained about the long hours to him but he seemed completely disinterested. |
8 July 1998 | I saw my GP Dr W [name withheld]. I mentioned that I was feeling really tired and finding it hard to concentrate. She took a blood sample to see if I was suffering from anaemia which I wasn't. I was diagnosed as suffering from depression. I told my GP all about the duties and hours that I was working and that I was finding it extremely hard to cope especially on early turns. I was offered counselling which I didn't take up simply because I didn't have enough time to go and see the counsellor. |