Re: Fatigue Rostering

[matthew@mail.usyd.edu.au (Matthew Geier)]

In article <3A49509B.576E2584@cia.com.au>, robson  <robson@cia.com.au> wrote:
>Marvin The Martian wrote:
>
>Mark and Roz CREELY wrote:
>
>>> NR have had fatigue management rostering for the last three years
>>> and I can assure you it does not work, (actually it does, it certainly
>>> makes you more fatigued.).
>
>
>Perhaps the inventors of this marvelous idea should be made aware of this. (The Centre for
>Sleep Research). Their web site is
>http://www.unisa.edu.au/sleep/main/tcsr_home.html where their research documents on
>shiftwork and fatigue can be found.

 The research groups ideas and methods may really work, but what is actually
implemented by the companies is probably competely different !.
 NR and Cityrail will take the program then alter it for 'comemrcial reasons' which
in the process will probably change the entire foundation premises for the orginal
research and program development.

 What would be telling is for the Centre for Sleep Research to audit the fatigue
programs as implemented and document how they vary from the 'ideal' the research
orginally found.

 Some of the 'commercial reasons' may make the program worse than useless. When this
is found by the companies, it will be of course a flaw in the basic reasearch and
not their 'commercial reasons'.

 This is one reason why University research programs should be publicly funded.
'Industry' funded research has a habit of finding what ever said industry wants,
particularly in this area where there is a lot of subjective input data that
is easy to twist into what ever you want.