Carillion off the tender lists
The national press, and indeed the weekly magazine which is sent to civil engineers by their Institution, were quick to feature the news that for a while at least, Carillion Rail will not be invited to tender for Network Rail projects due to their relatively high rate of reported accidents.
“Accident-free-days” is the frequently used way to remind site staff of the need to put working safely at the top of their priorities each day. The safety professionals love them or hate them, (and I make no comment about Graham Bickerdike’s contribution this month!) prefer the use of AFR or Accident Frequency Rates.
This makes everyone’s figures comparable, and is simply the number of reportable accidents per hundred thousand hours worked. Network Rail are currently pleased to have reduced their overall AFR to 0.25, whilst Carillion’s had crept up to 0.5!
Safety performance top of the agenda
Network Rail is on record as commenting that they expressed their concerns ten months ago. Network Rail’s Simon Kirby said that the temporary resting of Carillion was not just about the accident statistics, but also their underlying safety culture. He also made it clear that further improvements to the industry’s safety performance are at the top of Network Rail’s agenda.
Carillion Rail maintain that their safety record stands comparison with the best in their sector, and dismiss the blip caused by seven reportable accidents in June and July, whilst they were restructuring their rail business. Carillion has been responsible for delivering many major and innovative contracts during the last twelve months, with staff working around three hundred million hours to do so.
Temptation to avoid reporting accidents
I have no doubts about the commitment of Network Rail’s top management to improving the safety of track staff, whoever their employers may be. The example, which has been made of one of the leading specialist rail contractors in this country, sends out a clear message that safety is a top priority for Network Rail.
But there is also a danger in concentrating on statistics, especially accident statistics. Winning a Safety 365 award based on accident free days, and the possibility of being denied work due to a rise in the number of accidents, will surely tempt some to avoid reporting accidents. Worse still, is the evident under-reporting of incidents and near misses.
Whilst forceful and focused management is in vogue, and can produce results in some areas for a limited time, the convinced commitment of all “the troops” will always deliver better results in the long run. We need a comprehensive change in safety culture, and maybe a refocusing of middle management to go with it!
Reporting incidents and near misses needs to rise
The work of the Safety 365 Trucks in listening to our safety concerns is excellent and we should all make much more use of them. After all they are free and willing to go anywhere. (Just contact Andy Pheby of Network Rail and they will soon be with you!) But even he cannot do it all.
CIRAS (Confidential Incident Reporting and Analysis System) is now available to everyone who works on the infrastructure, not just those who support it financially. Again their commitment to ensure confidentiality is unquestionable. But in the past we have all been concerned that the detailed descriptions of incidents and near misses featured in their bulletins sometimes, inadvertently revealed the likely source of the reports.
We need their services and I strongly recommend working with them to help refocus and deliver reports which, together with those from the safety trucks and companies own systems, should provide the information we need to achieve better safety performances.
I do not believe that the current safety campaign will really achieve its aim of stopping fatalities and reducing accidents, unless we first experience a significant rise in the reporting of near misses and incidents. Should we be looking to reward the contractor with the biggest list of reports by offering that company the opportunity to tender for substantially more work?
Free communications courses, with give-aways!
Whatever happened to the sensible practice of giving people and projects titles we could all easily understand? We seem to have gone overboard in creating jargon. I have the business card of a manager with her Majesty’s Railway Inspectorate, which describes him as being part of “Unit 1”. What is Unit 1 you ask? I regret that I am as much in the dark as you are!
I put the title “SAF 6” in the same category, but without knowing what it stands for, I appreciate and applaud the railway communications project included in it. In essence Network Rail, through their national project manager Tony Walton, are offering free one-day courses in voice communication. The courses are described as being interactive and involve “maximum participation”. Attendance results in “freebies” in the form of “aide memoire cards”. Case studies and “practical scenarios” are included.
All in this together
The objectives include understanding and overcoming the barriers to communication, applying communication methods to comply with the Rule Book, understanding “lead responsibility” and ensuring understanding by taking part in practical exercises.
Two organisations Benchmark (London North-Western, and Wessex areas) and Mabway (London North Eastern, Scotland, Sussex and East Anglia) are running these free courses. They both use former Ministry of Defence Instructors.
They have just started, and will continue until March next year. I suggest you book on early by contacting Tony Walton at Network Rail in Melton Street. Who knows you might even have to suffer my company on one of them!
Network Rail’s briefing document makes it clear that they realise the best results will be achieved if each and every course is attended by some of their own people, including signallers and operators, together with train drivers and guards as well as track staff. At last the idea that all railway staff, whoever their employers are, need to be together has been recognised!
Task Briefing out on trial!
Network Rail’s initiative to simplify Method Statements is very welcome. The new sensibly sized Task Briefing forms are already being tried out. They will not be the only documentation, but should be the only sheet of paper used by those who brief and do the actual work.
They cannot, nor should they, replace the Project Health and Safety Plan produced and signed off between project managers and engineers. Nor will they replace work package information detailing how the work will be done.
The Task Briefing Forms only include the site and work shift specific information, which is needed by trained competent people to do the work safely and well. It is prepared for that particular site and that particular shift. It should not contain anything else.
It needs site specifics on resources and permits for the work, contact telephone numbers for reference, and details of first aid and welfare arrangements. Perhaps the acid test should be to look through it, and reject it if it contains anything that might have been merely cut and pasted from another document!
All good news, but are managers and supervisors listening hard enough? Are they all focused on safety as the top priority yet? In the wee small hours of a Monday morning, when it has just started to rain and the end of the possession is fast approaching, how often does the man in charge still say “Never mind what that says just get the B***** thing finished will you?” We still have a way to go.
Date: September 11th 2006