WCRC Licence Suspended

Erm yes there was - the computer said no........... it caused chaos!

 

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/so-we-meet-again-southern-tells-commuters-2015050197927

 

Yes, sure - things go wrong - but it is the reasons behind why they go wrong - and the operator's reaction that is the issue here - not that whether trains, signals or other bits of the rail network don't behave as required all the time!

Steven

 

It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that a driver for one of the major freight companies could do a reproduction of the Wootton Bassett circumstances, right down to being stranded across the junction. We can be very sure that NR would not suspend that company because, to be blunt, they would be too important to the national economy. In such circumstances NR would have to rely, for justification, on a catalogue of previous misdemeanours by WCRC. This would be territory where matters would get very sensitive for a regulator which must be able to demonstrate treating all its users fairly.

 

From WNXX

 

The fact remains that the same specific incident could result in either suspension or non-suspension dependent on history and reaction. Network Rail may well be justified in taking the "this is the last straw" response but any regulator has to be very sure of its ability to explain its position to the media. A SPAD, with possibly a photo of a train stranded across a junction, makes easily understood graphic news whereas regulatory history is of little interest to the media. I have been in a position where a reliable company and a shyster company have been guilty of the same irregularity and the need to show absolute fairness has to be treated very carefully. I once had a house crammed with goods stored in the course of trade. A few streets away a house was crammed with junk by an obsessive hoarder with mental health problems. As I said, any regulator has to be very careful.

 

The point is that, according to what the Network Rail suspension letter said, WCRC were not suspended for what happened at Wootton Bassett but rather because of the background and reaction to it. I don't think it would matter how important or not any TOC or FOC was to the national economy (and arguably FOCs are the worst example to use as each could do much of the others work and freight flows change operator regularly), if the network operator and/or the Regulator had concerns about any operator's approach to safety and compliance, their hand would be pretty much tied as to what they could, or perhaps could not, do.

Steven

 

The concern of the regulator is to make sure any chosen intervention or course of action is proportionate in the circumstances. Considerations of how the media will report it would not be taken into account when deciding upon that action.
Once the decision has been made a media strategy may be required where an issue is likely to give rise to a high level if interest.
The judgement and the publicity are entirely separate.

 

I don't like how ORR are saying that they have started the 28- day process to revoke WCRC. It doesn't sound good to me. Put it into that context.

 

Well I was hoping I might have found some news on this thread instead of frothing..nope, more froth than a badly poured pint of lager!


Wake me up when something happens/changes

 

It's very much the attitude of the train operator in question here and whether they are managing their staff and safety. While the incident was frankly quite incredible and the actions of the crew jaw dropping, there are overall system factors at play. What is the culture of the company? Are lessons being learned? Not just by those at the coal face, but at all levels. Railtrack's issues in the 1990s were very much the product of naivety and arrogance, they were just not learning from their mistakes. There are certain parallels here. NR are not going to take any chances and rightly so, should the worst have occurred on that day, the public would have demanded the end to Steam on the main line whether enthusiasts like it or not.

I have read reports that WCR is run like a giant train set and have heard personal anecdotes that the company are not quite as tight as they should be and have an acidic relationship with Network Rail. The ORR should not be afraid to do what is necessary to send a message this sort of slack working and laissez-faire attitude is not to be tolerated.

There are some excellent Heritage companies and railways, but there are cowboys too. And it's the latter that will ruin it for the rest of us if we are not careful. The attack dogs of the mass media will see to that.

I note Nigel Harris in Rail Magazine has now written two editorials on this subject, the overall thrust I agree with. I think the concern is a genuine one, he is acutely aware of the ramifications should things go wrong. Having said that, the company he is former director of has had the worst cultural problems and follow up I have ever come across, they make Railtrack look like a 'cuddly' organisation, the 'boys with toys' accusations are every bit as apt in that case. Perhaps one shouldn't throw stones in glass houses?

 

You can't help how you feel... There's nothing wrong with being British; its a much under-appreciated term these days. In any case, despite the current state of affairs, Britain is too small for petty nationalisms, whether whining Scots, Welsh, English or Irish, in no particular order. Anyway, we digress...

 

At last somebody has finally hit the nail on the head. The SPAD everyone keeps going on about is as much a red herring to this whole thing as the incident on Southern was last week. Both are serious incidents and in their own right need / must and WILL be investigated. The major difference that is being inferred is the training of staff involved, evidence of that, competence / assessing, evidence of that, staff records, evidence of that, and so on etc. Incidents will always occur and some will be bad. Having well documented and procedures does not stop either happening, but it does show that if there is a staff error, equipment failure or even natural phenomenon to pee on your parade that you have procedures in place to deal with the staff concerned in a professional way, deal with the equipment failures and document what you have done.

 

The incidents occurring have prompted inquiries into their systems and procedures with the conclusion that they do not currently meet the requirements to hold a TAC.
However this is a TOC that has held a licence for many years. At what point did standards drop so they ceased to be complaint? Or is it the case the system doesn't have the capacity to routinely assure such things?
This is the most damming point from an industry wide perspective. The rules seems to require TOC to monitor and report on their own systems. To what extent are TOC systems and procedures third party assessed though prior to and during certification?

 

It does go round in circles yes, rather like a Surrey Hills circular, but I can understand why. In the absence of hard info, people still need to talk as they stand to lose one of their best friends / comfort blankets. Suggest we just let it be so long as nobody is abusive or does anything legally risky.

 

If you read back through this thread this nail has been fully hammered home, punched under and filled in. It's just that some of us have now laid down the hammer and await whatever fate has in store for WCR.

 

Exactly, this thread has become a whisky bottle / packet of fags equivalent for some that they just cannot put down !

 

And some folk have attempted to move it on to the bigger picture instead of looking at nail.

 

Yes, that's true, but until 15th May, it's all going to get labelled as speculation / froth. There was a time, not that long ago, when criticism of any kind directed at WCR was nearly always condemned on here. Naturally, that is now very difficult to sustain, but until the 15th May, there is still that hope among some that all will live happily ever after,