Major job losses proposed for Network Rail signalling grades

[whole diary]

[woody]

RAIL UNION RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) have confirmed that at yesterdays National Operations Council negotiating meeting Network Rail announced that under its long term operations strategy it intends to reduce dramatically the number of Signallers it currently employs.
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?action=post;board=36.0
RMT General Secretary Bob Crow said "We are not opposed to new technology but we are clear that any changes that may arise should be accommodated through a shorter working week, additional annual leave and the right to retire at 55 on full pension entitlement."
 Be cheaper to keep things as they are then!

[ChrisB]

What's that link for? :-)

[Electric train]

As an engineer this look an interesting challenge and opportunity however the Signalers are not a happy bunch, the comments on the internal websystem relating to the plan, 14 Railway Control Centers (RCO) to be implemented this is over quite a few years decades even in some places.  Didcot and Cardiff at the 2 shown for the GW^▸ (Great Western) route.  The move of Slough old and new to Didcot planned to be complete by the end of 2013 anyway

[paul7575]

The closure of mechanical boxes cannot have come as much of a surprise to any new entrant signallers, but the changes announced are to take place over a 15-20 year period anyway, ie half a typical career.  There should be no obvious reason why the overall reduction in manpower shouldn't be manageable mostly by normal retirement over the sort of timescales becoming apparent.   

Paul

[woody]

What's that link for? :-)

Oops sorry here is the correct link
http://www.rmt.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=148213

[Electric train]

The closure of mechanical boxes cannot have come as much of a surprise to any new entrant signallers, but the changes announced are to take place over a 15-20 year period anyway, ie half a typical career.  There should be no obvious reason why the overall reduction in manpower shouldn't be manageable mostly by normal retirement over the sort of timescales becoming apparent.   

Paul

I agree although there are some raip changes in the pipe line like the reduction of Electrical Control Rooms (ECR) from the current 7 Southern, 2 WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line), 1 ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line), 1 Scotland, 1 East Anglia (total) 12 down to 2 which will be located in 2 of the ROC^▸ (Rail Operating Centre - a centralised location for railway signalling and train control operations for a specific route or region) 1 in South 1 in North. 

There is new OD (obstacle Detection) technology in the final phase being tested for level crossings and the new modular signaling systems being deployed all of which improves the business case to remove mechanical boxes up to now the business case has been weak due to the reliability of mechanical signaling.

[paul7575]

A poster in the 'signalbox' forum gives the proposed dates of closures/transfers in the Wessex and Western areas, (sourced from the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers)'s private webpages), and also mentions Three Bridges and Manchester as being the locations of the two Electrical Control Rooms, presumably one for DC^▸ (Direct Current) and one for AC?

http://www.signalbox.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=3357&sid=ddee6f38f4e3999b9dc976f4867a6f8b

Paul
 

[Electric train]

and also mentions Three Bridges and Manchester as being the locations of the two Electrical Control Rooms, presumably one for DC^▸ (Direct Current) and one for AC?
Paul

I have to be a little careful here as possibly know a little too much, the ECR areas are not being split ac dc not even North South a more radical structure is proposed even to the extent that one ECR can cover for the other in the event one is compromised

[dviner]

I have to be a little careful here as possibly know a little too much, the ECR areas are not being split ac dc not even North South a more radical structure is proposed even to the extent that one ECR can cover for the other in the event one is compromised

For something like an ECR, it would make sense to plan in some redundancy.

It bothers me somewhat how much resistance is shown when it comes to modernisation plans for the railways. There are some magnificent examples of engineering and architecture out there which would be criminal to rip out just for the sake of it, but the railway network is a living thing, and needs to move with the times. Should a 21st Century railway network have to rely on a man in a box pulling levers and ringing bells?

Things have to evolve and move on - I get the impression that there's too much of "tried that back in xxxx, and it didn't work" and "we've always done it this way" which is put in the way of progress. It may not have worked then, but things have moved on - the things that stopped it from working may be surmountable with modern tech, and just because things have always been done one way doesn't mean it's the right way. I mean, we don't use children to clean chimneys any more...

[Electric train]

we don't use children to clean chimneys any more...

Oooooo  didn't know that .......... better cancel the contract issued last week for chimney cleaning 

You are right the railways are an ever evolving thing, problem is we have bits of kit that are expected to have a 20 to 30 year service life more often than not we get 50, 60 or more years life out of it, we do not live in a world now were we can rely on obsolete and obsolescent equipment or practices,  Jimmy Saville was 30 years ahead of his time ........... we are now in (que music and choir) "This is the age of the train" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd3NRr4SYiA

[smokey]

Jimmy at Bodmin Parkway Road.

No Trees to be seen, well not like today