Maintenance Phase 2b/c PIR
findings and recommendations
Final Version 1.4
2 September 2013
1
Contents
•
Post Implementation Review
•
Principles of Phase 2bc
•
Scope of the PIR
•
Findings
•
Recommendations with proposed owners and timescales
2
Post Implementation Review
• This PIR is the final PIR for Maintenance Restructure Phase 2bc
• This PIR is mandated as part of the safety validation and by OSART
• It was a commitment to our staff, the ORR and the Trades Unions
• It’s key objective is to confirm or otherwise whether the principles of Phase 2bc
were achieved and if not what recommendations should be taken
3
Phase 2bc objectives
• Standardising the structure of the organisation to improve management and control
of the business and facilitate smooth implementation of changes to improved
working practices
• Consistently sizing the organisation on current maintenance work volumes
• Reducing the cost of maintenance activities
• Creating an organisation that has the flexibility to undertake alternative work (life
extension, refurbishment and renewals) where this can be done cost effectively and
meet business requirements
• Facilitating the appropriate redeployment and retraining of employees that may be
affected by this proposal where this is appropriate and meets business
requirements
• Providing a more efficient but no less effective faulting and response capability
within the organisation
• Promoting and facilitating improved cross-discipline working and greater flexibility in
the deployment and use of the workforce within and between delivery units and
routes
• Bringing clarity on job purpose and accountabilities through the introduction of a
suite of standardised job descriptions
4
Scope of the PIR
Scope:
• Delivery of Phase 2b/c objectives
• Effectiveness of the organisation design, size and funding
• Management of safety/business risks and opportunities
• Management of vacancies, displaced staff and contracted resources
• Sustaining the delivery of the benefits
• Delivering productivity targets
• Section Manager workload
Exclusions:
• Changes to the organisation post Phase 2b/c
• Wessex Alliance, Devolution, DIME and Olympus are all subject to separate
reviews
5
PIR Findings
6
Findings (1)
RAG Status versus the original objectives
Delivery of Phase 2b/c objectives
• Standard template organisation structure for maintenance implemented
• The maintenance organisation headcount reduced by approximately 1,400 net as a direct
result of Phase 2bc
• The volume of work (Maintenance and Works Delivery volumes), being delivered has
remained largely unchanged since Phase 2b/c
• There is no adverse change in Asset condition measures or performance of the rail
network – (As an observation since the PIR there has been an adverse impact on
performance and speed restrictions which may require further investigation to understand
if this is partly or wholly due to Phase 2bc)
• Reliability trends are materially unchanged – there is a continued reduction in incident
counts
• Response ‘time to fix’ metric unchanged since Phase 2b/c
• Devolution has had an impact on maintenance delivery with Routes operating in a new
environment with direct control of maintenance budget and sizing decisions
• Over half of senior leaders interviewed commented that there is scope to further improve
T&Cs across geographies, promoting multi-skilling (which needs to be defined), crossdiscipline working (supports recommendation 8)
• Redeployment and retraining activities have, in general, been successful but the pace
could have been better (supports recommendation 6)
7
Findings (2)
RAG Status versus the original objectives
Effectiveness of the organisation design and sizing:
• Organisational design (the team structure below Section Manager) is considered fit for
purpose but the number of vacant posts across the business means it is not working as
planned. (supports recommendation 5)
• Some specific disciplines (Off-Track, OLE, Ultrasonic testing) have particular issues in
the size of their organisation (supports recommendation 4)
• Instances of team size by task not being utilised effectively and the sizing principles not
being consistently applied (supports recommendation 4&8)
• Although work volumes have not increased national work backlog has increased since
Phase 2b/c and the causes and implications of this should be investigated further
including whether it is due to funding and access availability to understand if remedial
action should be undertaken (supports recommendation 3,4&5)
8
Findings (3)
RAG Status versus the original objectives
Management of safety/business risks and opportunities:
• There is no evidence to suggest that the changes have had material impact on the
number of safety incidents. However, the key measures of AFR and FWI have increased
but are now levelling off this is partially due to the implementation of the initiatives from
10 point plan
• 81% of Senior Leaders suggested that standard job descriptions have clarified the roles
and responsibilities of all staff in regard to safety
• There remains scope to improve the level of understanding amongst the workforce
around ‘why’ we are delivering work and how we could do it smarter and more efficiently
(supports recommendation 8)
9
Findings (4)
RAG Status versus the original objectives
Management of vacancies, displaced staff and contracted resources:
• 65% of Senior Leaders interviewed considered the displacement process to be
transparent and suggested that it gave the opportunity to engage staff. 20% thought,
however, that it led to the loss of some valuable team members
• Around 127 people remain displaced – but 85% of those affected have been successfully
released or redeployed
• Considerable vacancy gaps exist in some areas of the direct organisation including those
posts created as part of the 6 month PIR (supports recommendation 5)
• There has been a marked increase in the use of Labour Only Subcontractors (LOSC)
being used to cover core work and vacancies (supports recommendation 5)
10
Findings (5)
RAG Status versus the original objectives
Sustaining the delivery of the benefits:
• Standardised maintenance team structure materially remains in place although the
Routes have resized some parts of the organisation
• Initial headcount reduction has been sustained to date, with the exception of roles reintroduced following initial 6 month PIR
• The cost of maintenance continues to outperform the CP4 requirements, but there are
some data quality and opex/capex issues which require further work to improve the
capture of maintenance costs (supports recommendation 3&7)
• New ways of working in place, but effectiveness should be challenged by the Depot
Project and there are issues around the effective implementation of team size by task
and effective use of the sizing principles (supports recommendation 8)
• Benefits of Phase 2b/c are being over-taken by Devolution and other change
programmes
11
Findings (6)
RAG Status versus the original objectives
Delivering productivity targets:
• Depot teams are delivering broadly the same work volumes, but backlog has increased
and the work is being delivered in many cases with fewer staff (supports recommendation
5)
• Data suggests that unit costs have reduced since Phase 2b/c
• Clear need to better understand productivity and agree a more transparent measure
(supports recommendation 7&8)
• Instances of fragmented and disparate data systems at DU level could be impacting the
effectiveness of local decision making (supports recommendation 7)
• Maximising the benefits from the working practice changes (supports recommendation 8)
– Consistent rostering has been implemented successfully but issues existing in the
use of team size by task
– Current T&Cs for frontline staff are quoted by senior managers as one of the biggest
barriers to maximising the business benefits across all Routes.
– 55% of Senior Leaders interviewed claimed that dropping multi-skilling from the
scope of Phase 2b/c meant that a key enabler of future efficiencies was lost - this
should be defined and reinstated as a key priority in the future
• Better management information across all depots would facilitate knowledge transfer and
allow leaders to benchmark performance, particularly in relation to the introduction of new
working practices (supports recommendation 7)
12
Findings (7)
RAG Status versus the original objectives
Section Manager workload and Planning:
• SM workload remains a longstanding issue and has not been successfully addressed as
part of Phase 2bc (supports recommendation 1)
• SMs indicate that the average working week is high, at 52 hours, and 74% have seen an
increase in workload since Phase 2 B/C (supports recommendation 1)
• 75% of SM indicated Phase 2bc has had a negative impact on the organisation (supports
recommendation 1)
• 60% of RIMDs and IMDMs believe that they are not necessarily able to focus on the right
work and that further support/training may be required to address this. (supports
recommendations 1&6)
• Role profiles introduced in Phase 2b/c (not consulted with TU’s) have not been effectively
embedded into the organisation and could be improved by consideration in the Depot
Project (supports recommendation 6)
• More clarity is also required on the SM support roles (Section Planner and Supervisor
roles, Admin and consideration should be given to how this part of the organisation
operates as is not operating at an optimal level at the moment (supports recommendation
2)
• Nearly half of RIMDs and IMDMs claim that it is difficult to recruit SMs due to the nature
of the role, a lack of clear career progression and external competition for necessary
skills (supports recommendation 2&6)
13
Recommendations
Recommendations with proposed owners and timescales
14
Recommendations
Recommendations have been grouped into eight themes:
1. Section Managers
2. Planning
3. Business Plan
4. Sizing
5. Vacancy management
6. Training and competencies
7. System and Management Information
8. T&Cs and pooling resources
•
•
Proposed recommendation owners and timescales have been
included. The recommendations are to enable compliance with the
principles of Phase 2bc
Where applicable the recommendations have been aligned to the
Depot Project themes or projects to avoid duplication of work
15
1. Section Managers
Recommendations
1. Section Managers:
• Undertake more detailed analysis on SM workload
including required support and division of time including
business continuity – (cover for leave, sickness, training
etc.)
Action Owner
Timing
Route Managing
Director LNW
Within 6 months
(Delivered via the
Depot Project
Activities theme)
– Consideration to be given to changing the
organisation design of SM organisation including
the reporting line of the direct organisation. In
revising the responsibilities of the Section
Supervisor /Planner/Administrator roles care
should be taken not to just transfer accountabilities
to the Team Leader
– Clearly define the role of a SM using a role based
competence model including creation of a Section
Manager Manual with competency requirements
– The TUs should be involved in the above reviews
Objective: Focus Section Manager time on
engineering Tasks
16
2. Planning
Recommendations
2. Planning:
• Review the planning processes to align accountabilities,
competence and tools at DU level – Link to DU Project
– Review in more detail the role of the Section
Planner, using a role based competence model,
delivering focused training and support to this role
Action Owner
Timing
Route Managing
Director South East
Within 6 months
(Delivered via the
Depot Project
Planning theme)
– This review to be undertaken ahead of ad hoc
changes to Route planning and Admin
arrangements
Objective: Restructure Planning and
redefine role / competency of Planner
roles
17
3.Business Plan
Recommendations
3. Business Plan - funding and budgets:
• Calculate the true cost of maintenance for every Route
and Delivery Unit
• Determine and confirm funding arrangements for actual
cost of maintenance and align resource plans
Action Owner
Timing
Route
Managing Directors
Within 6 months
(Delivered via the
Business Planning
Process)
Objective: Alignment between
maintenance costs, resource plan and
funding requirements
18
4. Sizing
Recommendations
Action Owner
Timing
4. Sizing:
Route
Managing Directors
Within 6 months
• Review the sizing of the SM and direct organisation
including the consistent use of the sizing principles
(linked to the Section Manager recommendations)
• Address specific issues around size of Off-track and
OLE teams and some specialist services (e.g.
Ultrasonic testing) activities at Route level
(Supported by the
Establishment
Review)
• Resize and consult in/out posts within the organisation
where there is a change in the workload requirements
• Safety Validate the new organisation
Objective: Right sized organisation
consulted and safety validated
19
5.Vacancy Management
Recommendations
5. Vacancy management:
• Undertake a detailed analysis on the increased use of
LOSC’s and contractors to fill resource gaps in the
current organisation
• Fill vacancies to meet the consulted direct maintenance
organisation establishment and where staff and
competency shortages are impacting the works delivery
organisations performance. Support this with metrics
for monitoring and measuring vacancies
Action Owner
Timing
Route
Managing Directors
Within 6 months
(Supported by the
Establishment
Review)
• Use new Voluntary Severance scheme to target
specific areas of the business with surplus resources
Objective: Effective resourced
organisation which matches the
organisation design
20
6.Training and Competence
Recommendations
6. Training and competencies:
• Improve the selection and prioritisation of competences
through the implementation of a national competency
prioritisation system which identifies short, medium and
long term requirements
• Provide better guidance on what constitutes short term
or urgent requirements for training and competence and
ask Routes to re-run their training needs analysis
Action Owner
Timing
Head of
Professional
Development
and Training
Within 12 months
(Delivered via the
Competence work
stream of the
Business Critical
Rules Programme)
• The TUs should be briefed / engaged on the
competence prioritisation system
Objective: Effective assessment process
and training plan to support business
requirements
21
7. Systems and Management Information
Recommendations
Action Owner
Within 12 months
7. System and MI issues:
• Define, capture and maintain a simplified set of safety,
assurance, performance, resource and financial
metrics and agree how to manage, analyse and report
those metrics
• Provide the ability to easily identify separately
maintenance and works delivery volumes in ellipse
• A number of data quality issues require further
investigation and fixing: includes HR, and AI Systems.
• Consider creating a programme to integrate the
systems used to store and analyse data at Depot level
Timing
Route Managing
Director Western
(Delivered via the
Depot Project
Management
Information theme)
Route Managing
Director Anglia
(Delivered via the
Depot Project
Systems theme)
Objective: Improvement in the data set
that we manage/monitor our business with
including leading and lagging indictors
22
8. Standard T&Cs and pooling resources
Risks
Action Owner
8. T&Cs and pooling of resources:
Route Managing
• Consider revisiting the creation of a standard set of T&Cs Director Scotland
• Working practice changes:
– Investigate the extent to which working practice
changes have been used properly across all DUs
Timing
Within 12months
(Delivered via the
Depot Project
Rostering theme)
– Review the use of team size by task to enable a
consistent use of its application across the DUs
• Consider and define what “Multi-skilling” elements are
needed and practicable
• Reinforce that any proposed changes to organisation
size or structure will require appropriate formal
consultation with the relevant Trades Union
• New posts to be advertised in accordance with agreed
process and D&I policy
Objective: Standard set of
T&Cs/Enforcement of existing T&Cs;
pooling of resources
23