Re: Another RSA worker killed

["Peter Perkins" <peterp@tig.com.au>]

One of the common threads to injuries such as these is the deregulation of
the RSA and the awarding of contracts for rail maintenance. The RSA workers
are demoralised at the continual contracting out of work and exist in a
limbo land. One wonders how much organisation, training, safety equipment
etc gets to these workers when the ultimate aim is make them redundant and
introduce contractors. We must also remember that many of those killed in
the past have been contractors.
Companies such as Fluor Daniel have an appalling safety record not only here
but in the US and other countries around the globe. (If anybody wants proof
of what i've said about Fluor then email me. I have lots of literature about
their safety problems)

The Government's division of the SRA into 4 separate entities has meant that
the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Anyone working with
rail information knows that information about trackworking etc is basic and
fragmented around the system and that if you dont chase it up yourself you
miss out on vital information.

The other aspect that has a bearing on all this was the watering down of the
safety codes last year some time as outlined in a document
called "Affordable Safety Policy". Don't hold me to the title but I
recollect that this HR inspired document weighed up the cost of providing
safety as compared with an acceptable level of death or injury. Ill see if I
can find a copy and post it here - interesting if not ridiculous proposal
which no doubt was introduced as policy. This mathematical and statistical
way of measuring risk against cost was accepted by both unions. No doubt
there are savings to be made in this area, but they are paid for by the
deaths of rail workers.

cost savings =cost from number of deaths or injuries - savings from not
providing full safety mechanisms