Supervisors conducting shunt duties without holding the correct medical certification

[Operator] acknowledges the reporter’s concerns and provides a response on each element below. In summary, [Operator] does not believe there is validity in the concerns raised by the reporter, further explained below:

The reporter has raised a concern relating to supervisors conducting shunt duties without holding the correct medical certification.

[Operator] has reviewed this concern and has confirmed that supervisors who conduct shunting duties have all completed the category of medical required, and hold a current certificate of fitness, in accordance with the requirements of the National Standard for Health Assessments of Rail Safety Workers.

The reporter further states the staff members involved are not competent to be conducting shunt duties.

[Operator] has reviewed and confirmed that all staff members involved in shunting activities hold the units of competence required by [Operator]’s [training standard].

Those leaders who do not hold the relevant shunt qualifications may still perform observations and assurance activities within the yard that do not require those qualifications to be obtained.

The reporter also states incidents occurring at [Location] are not being reported correctly and drivers undergoing training are being signed off on paper and not actual route assessments.

In relation to the route assessment concern, [Operator] restates the response provided to REPCON RR2023-00016, extract provided below.

[Operator]’s Safety Management System, specifically the [training standard], details the minimum training and competency requirements for train crew. The [training standard] requires routes to be risk assessed to determine route complexity. Training requirements are then determined based on route complexity.

For:

1. Non-complex routes, only a theory assessment is required to be completed to confer route competency. This assessment is marked by a route competent enterprise assessor.

2. Complex routes, both a theory and a practical assessment (conducted by a route competent enterprise assessor) is required to be completed.

Through an action committed in the [team] activity in [date], [Operator] has reviewed route risk assessments to confirm assessed route complexities are appropriate. The review confirmed that the route complexity risk assessments are up-to-date and appropriate.

In relation to the reporter's concern that incidents occurring at [Location] are not being reported correctly, [Operator] has found no evidence to support this claim. [Operator]’s reporting system allows any worker to submit a report, and audit logs of the processing of that report are held within the system. [Operator] encourages all workers to report events and hazards, as they are observed, into the system. [Operator] would request the reporter make those submissions should they witness any unsafe conditions or behaviours.

The reporter has expressed a strong concern for the safety of personnel operating at [Location].

Per [Operator]’s response to REPCON RR2023-00016, there are strong safety initiatives and ongoing assurance activities to ensure the safety of personnel operating at [Location]. [Operator] has seen sustained improvement in key safety performance indicators since those initiatives were undertaken.