Trains halted after cable theft (BBC News)

[Deathbyteacup]

Yet more reason for Network Rail to bring everything in-house if you ask me. BR had the right ideas in that respect.

Sub-contracting has done nobody any favours on any level, has it?

[paul miller]

Thanks for the reply foggy, thats very enlightening.
By the way a friend of mine who works as a driver for EMT says a lot of these lineside workers remind him of nightclub bouncers. Real bruisers as he called them.
Paul.

[Gandalf]

Nothing wrong in employing sub contractors providing the employing company checks the work is being done correctly as they should even if it is being done by 'in-house' labour. If the work is not done satisfactorily then get rid of the sub contractor and employ another who does do the work properly on the other hand try getting rid of poor work people from an in-house department especially from state organisations who seem to get promoted if they create more problems than they 'inherited' from others.
John.

[Trev]

Metal theft seems to be the 'in' thing amongst the criminal fraternity at the moment. A colleague at work was one of over thirty people in Hull who have had their brass doorknobs stolen in the last week!

[Deathbyteacup]

Originally Posted by Gandalf

Nothing wrong in employing sub contractors providing the employing company checks the work is being done correctly as they should even if it is being done by 'in-house' labour. If the work is not done satisfactorily then get rid of the sub contractor and employ another who does do the work properly on the other hand try getting rid of poor work people from an in-house department especially from state organisations who seem to get promoted if they create more problems than they 'inherited' from others.
John.

It's far easier to monitor and manage an in-house team than it is to subcontract (which with Network Rail is even leading to sub-contracted sub-contracted workers) which makes it almost impossible to tell if the front line work force are cutting corners and so on and so forth.

Plus ultimately working in-house has cost benefits in the long run.

In-house staff answer to the top brass, if they fail in their jobs then they loose them, it's as simple as that. Sub-contracted workers can just move to the next contract, they don't worry (as much) about any repercusions.

I'm not saying it's entirely a bad thing. I just think Network Rail are benefiting from moving in-house and will continue to do so.

[Foghut]

If you look into the subject of Track Workers it's quite a tricky one. Just last Christmas there was an uproar (not that that's anything new) about the substantial overruns of engineering work. Subsequent investigations showed that a significant number of people who were expected to form the track gangs just didn't show up, causing the carefully scheduled work to fall behind.

Given that the pay is relatively poor, the work hard, and it's the Xmas holidays...it's hardly surprising that a worker forsakes the offer he's had from NR and goes off to get better money on the door of the Blue Oyster Club - he won't break into a sweat and he might even 'pull'. That's the danger of casual labour - Casual is what you get !

I would imagine that the cost would be prohibitive of having an in-house workforce that was big enough to cover all the engineering projects (which always happen simultaneously during holidays).

I agree that there would be great benefits - When possessions aren't required these people could form track gangs and be responsible for their own stretch of track. Test Trains like the Yellow Banana check many criteria of the ride, but they don't check the Pandrol clips and they can't beat the Mark 1 eyeball.

[Shed Cat]

Good point Foggy. If you are able to plan a steady work programme for years in advance you can keep permanent staff contiuously busy. But if it is boom and bust, with the public demanding that work is frantically crammed into short periods, or the Govt suddenly give the railways more money, or takes it away, then you end up having to use temporary labour from sub-contractors.

[paul miller]

So basically what you are saying gentlemen is that the old system when the railways were nationalised was a much better system. Am I rught in assuming that?
If that is the case, then it is as every other aspect of life now, we are cutting corners for short term gain. If that is the case we all know how quickly it will go down the pan dont we.
Paul.

[Foghut]

Ok well leading on from that, here's a challenge for everyone on a wet Saturday.....Can you name just ONE privatised industry where the customers actually received a better or cheaper service as a result of it being split up. ??

And a Brucey bonus to anyone who can name an organisation which took onto its Board of Governors any Civil Servants or Politicians who just happened to have been involved in that industry's break up !


Answers on a five pound note please

[G6 UXU]

You have hit the nail on the head there Paul, "short term gain" the big boys fill their accounts and then do a quick exit, unfortunately that is the name of the game these days. All the best.