I see that Iain Coucher is to leave Network Rail. Well, frankly, not before time. I worked for Railtrack at the time that Network Rail took over. One of Coucher’s first acts was to cut around three hundred middle management jobs. He was right to do so. However, instead of conducting a reverse recruitment exercise, identifying what skills and posts were surplus to requirements, he – along with his team – created a system based upon subjective criteria using the Network Rail “behaviours”. This gave line managers an excuse to remove people who had dared to disagree with them; the awkward squad if you like. This was a breach of employment law as this was not redundancy, it was unfair dismissal. For me, it was an opportunity as I was indeed disengaged with the company and had already lined up an alternative. As it was, I went with a very nice little financial package as a bonus. Network Rail included in the package the sum they would have been required to compensate me had I taken the matter to an industrial tribunal. So, like the others, I took the money and went quietly. On the face of it, it was a cheap solution to the company’s perceived problem – too many managers and too many people who didn’t toe the company line.
Unfortunately, those who like to be surrounded by “yes” men fail to recognise the value of those who have the effrontery to say “no” or to recognise that “no” might be the right answer or that the person saying it is doing so for sound reasons. I was one of the awkward squad – or as a subsequent business partner suggested, one of the creative minds who was selected on the night of the long knives; or as Network Rail put it, Operation Violet. All of this followed the absurd farce that was Q12 trialled during the summer of 2003. The company sought to remove those employees identified as disengaged without asking the basic question; why might that be? And, no, Q12 doesn’t answer that question, either.
Like many of those who were subjected to this breach of employment law, I was back fairly quickly in a different guise. I met those who, after a brief period of time were re-employed as their expertise was essential to the business, so the money spent dismissing them was wasted. On the other hand, expertise went and projects suffered as a consequence. One of my erstwhile colleagues phoned me shortly afterwards because she now had to deal with signal sighting – and she knew nothing about it. It was no longer my problem and I was no longer in a position to help. I subsequently spoke to people who had similar experiences on discovering that particular expertise had walked out of the door on November 17th 2003 with no plan to replace it.
One of the nastier aspects of that day was people finding out that they were “redundant” when they tried to log onto their email only to find that they were locked out. Operation Violet typified the new mood in Network Rail; a vindictive nastiness coupled with rank incompetence.
I still meet Network Rail employees who complain about yet another reorganisation that serves no useful purpose and the morale seems no better than it was a decade ago. Iain Coucher represents all that is wrong with Network Rail. His departure comes not a moment too soon. He won’t be missed, but I doubt the corrosive culture that exists both within Network Rail and its relationships with other rail companies will change anytime soon.
Absolutely spot on, I’m one of the less easily dismissables as the company still needs Signallers, much as it hates the fact, I’m planning to go in eighteen months and I can’t wait. This is what has happened to people like me with years of service a love of railways and from a railway family, we are just thoroughly fed up, so the very people who should be helping and motivating the next generation just aren’t interested anymore. Coucher is a corporate clone who should really have been a civil servant, the world’s full of them these days.
Tis ever so, all around the world, in every corporate re-org.
I’d like to say that British management are no more or less incompetent than in other lands, but evidence to date suggests that they are indeed spectacularly incompetent at almost anything they do.
Doesn’t it just…
“This gave line managers an excuse to remove people who had dared to disagree with them; the awkward squad if you like.”
Yes, ’tis ever so.
Especially, I suspect, in the state sector, which Network Rail is effectively part of – being a government created monopoly. (And I see that according to Wikipedia, both the National Audit Office and the Statistics Commission both agree that Network Rail is a state-owned company.)
My wife works in the state sector, and the boss invariably promotes yes-men and refuses to promote one particular chap who is probably the most able employee under his management. Mr. Able Employee is a nice bloke, but, alas, is quite willing to be let it be known when he doesn’t agree with the boss.
In the competitive atmosphere of the private sector, where the fittest survive, this sort of behaviour is far more likely to be weeded out.
.-= My last blog ..Bloody Sunday killings and public sector employees. =-.
“nstead of conducting a reverse recruitment exercise, identifying what skills and posts were surplus to requirements, he – along with his team – created a system based upon subjective criteria using the Network Rail “behaviours”. This gave line managers an excuse to remove people who had dared to disagree with them; the awkward squad if you like. “
I have friends in the civil service, and this is starting to be implemented there.
For the same reasons.
.-= My last blog ..Here’s Why You Never Run With Scissors… =-.
“Signal sighting” ???
Eh ???
It is the means by which we ensure that drivers see the signal in sufficient time to react to it – it was a big deal following the Paddington crash, even though in practice this wasn’t the underlying cause. Sighting is the process by which the location and height of the signal are checked to ensure that it is not obscured on the approach and that all traction using the route are covered.
It’s actually more simple than it sounds, but there is a group standard laying out the measurements that must be met. A signal sighting committee will convene when a new signal is being placed or there is a complaint about an existing signal or there is an incident. The committee will consist of someone with a signalling background (me in this case), someone from the train operator with a driving background, a signal engineer and possibly someone with a track background. There will also be a chairman to manage the process.
At the time I left Network Rail, I was involved in project managing the development of training for committee members.