POLL: Queensland Rail internal recruitment practices

[#Metro]

4-day poll on the Queensland Rail internal-first recruitment practice.

Votes visible after you have voted, and changes can be made up until poll close.

What do you think? Keep it or Abolish?

[MichaelJ]

I'd change Abolish to have recruitment open to both internal and external applicants as opposed to just external applicants first.  That way, the could even increase the benchmark and still receive the same number of successful applicants.

[tazzer9]

Just remember that when a they train a driver, they need to recruit from guards, which then need to be recruited from elsewhere in QR.   So in order to train 1 driver, they need to fill 3 job vacancies.   Not the most efficient way of doing things.   

[bretto82]

Ummmm no a guard is not the only position to go to driver they have track workers station staff cleaners the lot. They do have a better chance of making the cut as they already have the inner workings of it so please stop with the whole they only get guards to drivers as it's not ture

[#Metro]

Point of clarification: "ABOLISH" option - public recruitment means that BOTH internal and external staff are able to apply simultaneously.

Sorry, but I am unable to alter the poll text now that the poll is live. You are free to change your vote at anytime until poll close.

[Otto]

I voted Abolish on the proviso that recruitment is open to both external and internal applicants.

[MichaelJ]

Ummmm no a guard is not the only position to go to driver they have track workers station staff cleaners the lot. They do have a better chance of making the cut as they already have the inner workings of it so please stop with the whole they only get guards to drivers as it's not ture

Guard to Driver is the most logical progression but yeah, they come from everywhere. Guard first, stations second, then (for Sydney Trains) external.

The older (dying) generation of Drivers like to make a further distinction with Drivers: Freight Driver, Guard Driver and Street Driver.

[bretto82]

Ummmm no a guard is not the only position to go to driver they have track workers station staff cleaners the lot. They do have a better chance of making the cut as they already have the inner workings of it so please stop with the whole they only get guards to drivers as it's not ture

Guard to Driver is the most logical progression but yeah, they come from everywhere. Guard first, stations second, then (for Sydney Trains) external.

The older (dying) generation of Drivers like to make a further distinction with Drivers: Freight Driver, Guard Driver and Street Driver.

I know a lot of track workers who have starts going to drivers not as many got through to guard which I did not see happening but it's probably more they have already past the phycometric testing and having some RPL on route and signal knowledge and safeworking. My biggest issue was the fact some just say it's guard to driver and that's it which is not the case

[SurfRail]

We should pay MTR to set up an academy like the one I passed in Hung Hom earlier today while we're at it so management can upskill.

[#Metro]

FINAL CALL

Voting closes on this poll TODAY.

[#Metro]

Result - QR internal recruitment should be axed.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

13th January 2017

DUMP Queensland Rail internal recruitment "favouritism" provisions

Greetings,

RAIL Back on Track calls on Transport Minister Stirling Hinchliffe to immediately abolish Queensland Rail's "internal favouritism" provisions when hiring staff for positions.

Jackie Trad, in The Courier-Mail has said that there is a "bad culture" within Queensland Rail.

Well Deputy Premier, how did it get to that?

"Internal favouritism" provisions, are where only existing staff are hired to positions within Queensland Rail, before external applicants are considered (if at all).
This puts "old guard" employees at an advantage over new applicants.

It is much easier to hire your mates under such a scheme. Now we are not saying that this has actually happened, but clearly, when external competition is absent, it is much easier for it to occur. It is not rocket science to see that bad culture is the end result of a hiring process that only looks inward.

It is also inefficient and unfair that people who want to apply for one role have to apply for another, possibly completely unrelated role, just to get their "foot in the door" of the organisation.

Practices like that belong in another era.

Promotions must be based solely on merit, experience, and competency. Taxpayers are paying for Queensland Rail, so why should there be favoured groups?

We call on the minister to go further and make it an explicit policy that all positions are advertised publicly to all in the first instance.

The Queensland Rail Fail, which is now into its fifth month, has caused immense damage to the reputations of the Palaszczuk Government and the former Newman Government.

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track https://backontrack.org

References
https://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=12624.0

Queensland Rail: Jackie Trad says QR has bad culture
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-rail-jackie-trad-says-qr-has-bad-culture/news-story/00af22c75aec443fccf6ed4a6c209aad

Queensland Rail dramas: Minister discovered cancellations on Twitter
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/queensland-rail-dramas-minister-discovered-cancellations-on-twitter-20161102-gsgku0.html

[ozbob]

Latest media: ' DUMP @QueenslandRail internal recruitment "favouritism" provisions '
> https://t.co/bct0qHt7bp#qldpol@StirlHinchliffe pic.twitter.com/MwGBvOWJdV

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) January 13, 2017

[#Metro]

^^ This is why the head of HR at QR should probably be fired, as Paul Pluta is arguing.

This "look inwards" approach to recruitment is lazy, a bit like the "timetable backfill" because the normal planning was too complicated.

Yes, I realise that existing workers have a head start on competencies, but that is an argument for the applicant to make rather than justify

the en-masse deprioritisation/disenfranchisement of external applicants.


Mr Dawe was essentially an "internal recruitment". He sat on the Queensland Rail board until Newman and co pressed OVERRIDE on the

external recruitment drive to find a new CEO for QR. Thus he went from the board to the CEO position within the ELT of QR.


So that is another clue as to how this happened!

[ozbob]

.. Yes, I realise that existing workers have a head start on competencies, but that is an argument for the applicant to make rather than justify

the en-masse deprioritisation of external applicants. ...

Exactly.  When I was an academic at QUT, I had to apply for a position for tenure for example.  It was wide open to internal and external applicants - that is how the real world works.

Internal applicants often do have an advantage because of a head start on knowledge etc.  but it is healthy thing to have to truly compete.

[petey3801]

In reality, it doesn't matter how much anyone here or anywhere else jumps up and down or how loud they scream, it is not going to change anytime soon unless the agreement that is about to go to vote is voted down (no changes can be made to it now unless that happens). Next chance for it to change will be in toughly 4 years time.

[SurfRail]

No offence whatsoever intended to you or your colleagues Pete, but it really beggars belief that the workforce has the ability to impose that kind of control over who can apply for jobs.  As you say, it can't be fixed (short of something a lot more drastic than the government is currently prepared to do).

[#Metro]

RTBU website says 'in principle agreement'.

http://www.rtbu.com.au/01_cms/details.asp?ID=689

Whilst there is in-principle agreement for all five of the draft Agreements there is still the fine tuning required in the drafting process.

Work on this has been occurring this week and will continue into next week at which point Delegates who have been involved in negotiations will commence examining and be involved in the drafting exercise to ensure that the provisions in the Agreement meet the needs of the parties and are true to the agreements reached in negotiations.

Members should appreciate that regardless of the drafting process, the in-principle agreement stands in respect to the:

   6% pay rise you will receive from 1 March;
   a further 3% pay rise you will receive in the next two years; and
   3% back pay for approximately 12 months from 1 March coming

I would just also like to remind members that included in this agreement is:

   - tougher rules around contracting out and stronger emphasis on work being done in-house;
   - fairer rules around insecure employment, helping casual employees gain certainty; and
   - rectifying changes made to policy by the previous Newman Government

Following the drafting of the Agreements there is a requirement for them to be distributed to all of you for consideration. After the period given for consideration members will be provided with the opportunity to vote on whether or not you wish to accept their Agreement.

Perhaps QR can refuse to sign it. Does the minister have to sign it too?

Something else caught my eye - 80% of QR is male. Seems to be a massive gender imbalance outside of admin roles.

https://www.queenslandrail.com.au/about%20us/Documents/Queensland%20Rail%20FY2014-15%20Annual%20and%20Financial%20Report%20-%20FINAL.pdf

As one of the state's largest employers, Queensland Rail understands that its success is dependent on leveraging the capability of its people.

As at 30 June 2015, there were 5778 full-time equivalents (FTEs)
employed at Queensland Rail, of which:

• 88 per cent were employed in core functions (Citytrain, Regional
Network and Freight, Travel and Tourism)

• The top three occupations were train drivers (10.8 per cent),
station managers and officers (10.3 per cent), and trackworkers
(10.2 per cent)

• 20 per cent were women (48 per cent in enabling functions and
16 per cent in core functions)

• 2 per cent identified as being Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander,
5 per cent as having a disability and 8 per cent as coming from a
non-English speaking background

• 94 per cent were employed on a permanent basis

• The permanent separation rate was 5.6 per cent

• The average length of service was 15 years and the average age
of employees was 44.6 years

[petey3801]

Honestly, I don't think the majority of traincrew really mind whether people come from internal or external. Considering I was an external hure, it would be quite hypocritical of me to be against external hiring! QR wouldn't really be against it at the moment I imagine as it makes the recruitment process cheaper and quicker for them by not having to go external.
Metro, as I said earlier. The agreement cannot be changed now unless it is voted down. Negotiations are done. QR have signed off on it, unions have signed off on it. Up to whether the rest of traincrew vote in favour of it or not.

[#Metro]

Wow, just wow. 

Restricting recruitment of external applicants creates four challenges:

1. For every driver that Queensland Rail recruits from guard ranks, Queensland Rail must recruit an additional person, typically from other parts of Queensland Rail, to replace that guard. This depletes talent across the organisation and requires Queensland Rail to undertake a further recruitment process to fill vacated positions

2. Restricting the pool of driver applicants to current guards reduces the number of applicants from outside Queensland Rail and limits the number of female applicants due to the demographic of guard ranks

3. Limiting the sources of applicants reduces the competitive nature of the recruitment process and hence the future quality of potential train crew

4. During periods of high demand for guards, guards may be withdrawn from driver schools to operate services, hence elongating training durations.

The Commission notes that other rail operators such as Deutsche Bahn and Sydney Trains have had significant success recruiting drivers and guards from outside their organisations, and have maintained lower average training durations than Queensland Rail

[verbatim9]

Wow, just wow. 

Restricting recruitment of external applicants creates four challenges:

1. For every driver that Queensland Rail recruits from guard ranks, Queensland Rail must recruit an additional person, typically from other parts of Queensland Rail, to replace that guard. This depletes talent across the organisation and requires Queensland Rail to undertake a further recruitment process to fill vacated positions

2. Restricting the pool of driver applicants to current guards reduces the number of applicants from outside Queensland Rail and limits the number of female applicants due to the demographic of guard ranks

3. Limiting the sources of applicants reduces the competitive nature of the recruitment process and hence the future quality of potential train crew

4. During periods of high demand for guards, guards may be withdrawn from driver schools to operate services, hence elongating training durations.

The Commission notes that other rail operators such as Deutsche Bahn and Sydney Trains have had significant success recruiting drivers and guards from outside their organisations, and have maintained lower average training durations than Queensland Rail

I hope that QR rips up the current agreement with unions and are then able to recruit externally for drivers.

[petey3801]

Wow, just wow. 

Restricting recruitment of external applicants creates four challenges:

1. For every driver that Queensland Rail recruits from guard ranks, Queensland Rail must recruit an additional person, typically from other parts of Queensland Rail, to replace that guard. This depletes talent across the organisation and requires Queensland Rail to undertake a further recruitment process to fill vacated positions

2. Restricting the pool of driver applicants to current guards reduces the number of applicants from outside Queensland Rail and limits the number of female applicants due to the demographic of guard ranks

3. Limiting the sources of applicants reduces the competitive nature of the recruitment process and hence the future quality of potential train crew

4. During periods of high demand for guards, guards may be withdrawn from driver schools to operate services, hence elongating training durations.

The Commission notes that other rail operators such as Deutsche Bahn and Sydney Trains have had significant success recruiting drivers and guards from outside their organisations, and have maintained lower average training durations than Queensland Rail

I hope that QR rips up the current agreement with unions and are then able to recruit externally for drivers.

FFS. They. Can't. Do. That.

It's a workplace agreement. It's not something that can just be ignored/cancelled at the whim of whoever wants to do so. Negotiations be able to take place with unions to alter some aspects at some point (not sure though), but that's about as far as it will go. Anyway, there are now around TWO HUNDRED drivers waiting for a school, how many more do you want?!? Hiring externally has absolutely no purpose anymore for the next couple years until the current recruitment has mostly passed through (ie: a few months before the final school is due to start), so plenty of time for QR to negotiate with the unions about altering a couple aspects if it is possible.

[#Metro]

Uh, most (if not all) railways around the world tend to work with a slight shortage of traincrew as a general rule of thumb. Generally better to call some people in for overtime (means a bit more $$ for staff, helping to boost morale also) than have people sitting around doing nothing while being paid (on top of normal 'standby' crew, which are counted for in the normal rosters). So yes, your beloved Metro would do a very similar thing.

Disagree.

Strachan report details Sydney Trains - which had a long history of poor service as RailCorp. They don't do this.

Third, Sydney Trains does not have a Board of Directors, considerably simplifying governance arrangements. It does, however, still rely on independent membership on Audit and Safety committees.

Second, Sydney Trains targets and maintains a persistent surplus of train crew. This is achieved by using conservative estimates in forecasting demand and sizing recruitment and training efforts to ensure sufficient supply. Drawing on overtime to meet service levels is considered an exception.

[Stillwater]

For the Opposition it is probably a case of job done -- claimed a ministerial scalp, everything is right from here on in, just need to get stuck into Jackie Trad.

[petey3801]

Uh, most (if not all) railways around the world tend to work with a slight shortage of traincrew as a general rule of thumb. Generally better to call some people in for overtime (means a bit more $$ for staff, helping to boost morale also) than have people sitting around doing nothing while being paid (on top of normal 'standby' crew, which are counted for in the normal rosters). So yes, your beloved Metro would do a very similar thing.

Disagree.

Strachan report details Sydney Trains - which had a long history of poor service as RailCorp. They don't do this.

Third, Sydney Trains does not have a Board of Directors, considerably simplifying governance arrangements. It does, however, still rely on independent membership on Audit and Safety committees.

Second, Sydney Trains targets and maintains a persistent surplus of train crew. This is achieved by using conservative estimates in forecasting demand and sizing recruitment and training efforts to ensure sufficient supply. Drawing on overtime to meet service levels is considered an exception.

And guess what happens down there? Everyone whinges that the railways have too many staff and people are getting paid to sit on their arse and do nothing. Different styles of management. To be honest, I prefer the slight under than slight over supply method. But it's ok, you obviously know absolutely everything there is to know about everything as usual, so i'll leave you be and go back to the place that I actually work for a living, but apparently don't know anything about.

[techblitz]

metro makes very valid arguments re: Sydney driver surplus...no need to get personal on him for that.......so your saying that because of what 'people may think'.......queensland rail should run at a slight undersupply than oversupply??
Cant any excess drivers just be moved to guard duties? If QR has to pay extra for the training and then having to pay those 'temp guards' driver wages as a result then so be it.....better to be safe(at a slightly extra cost) than sorry......

[petey3801]

No. Not how it works sorry. Also, why have drivers doing huard duties if there is also an oversupply of guards?? Plus, I was having a go because he has once again turned in to an expert in everything because he read one report, as usual, and ai am sock and tired of armchair experts dictating what should happen when they have zero idea of what they are talking about.
Some facts:
1) Crewing numbers go up and down all the time.
2) It is cheaper and (IMO) smarter to run at slight undersupply in normal workings than oversupply.
- Under supply (slight) results in higher productivity of staff, some overtime for staff who want it (not excessive) which leads to a higher morale among the staff which leads to higher productivity.
- Oversupply results in people sitting around doing nothing and getting paid for it, meaning less productivity. Small spike of morale at the start ($$ for nothing), which then goes the opposite way when staff feel their time is being wasted and they could be doing other things.

A good way to run is a slight undersupply for normal workings with constant recruitment/training to address natural attrition rates. When looking at adding new services, increase the recruitment until there is a small oversupply, then add the new services and the staffing levels go back to slight undersupply. The thing that is debatable is the actual level of undersupply that the place should be running at, which at the moment is (obviously) severe undersupply.

[#Metro]

No. Not how it works sorry. Also, why have drivers doing huard duties if there is also an oversupply of guards?? Plus, I was having a go because he has once again turned in to an expert in everything because he read one report, as usual, and ai am sock and tired of armchair experts dictating what should happen when they have zero idea of what they are talking about.

1. I have never made the claim that I am an expert. The forum is open to non-experts.

2. When Queensland Rail starts taxing only " rail experts " bank accounts to fund its operations, then it can stop having to deal with no-

nothing plebs / the great unwashed public. Until then, expect to get all sorts of uninformed public feedback.

3. I may not be an expert, but the suggestion is from Mr Strachan, who IS an expert and has run railways. He backed up his view with an

example from Sydney Trains, which has a larger and more complex network.

4. Yes it does cost more. But so does having fire alarms, emergency fire stairs etc. installed in your house. On critical networks it makes sense to have contingency. If the current way of doing this overtime was so great, we would not be in this mess.

The overtime backfill system COLLAPSED okay. Do you accept that it collapsed?

Mr Kevin Wright I believe was responsible for timetabling - 50 years or so on railways. It COLLAPSED. That method worked fine for decades at QR until it didn't.

Find savings elsewhere to offset the cost - such as progressively upgrade lines  (e.g. Gold Coast) so that some lines don't need guards.

I would never claim that I am an expert or that I am right 100% of the time. I am not, but one gets nowhere if you don't ask and question.

metro makes very valid arguments re: Sydney driver surplus...no need to get personal on him for that.......so your saying that because of what 'people may think'.......queensland rail should run at a slight undersupply than oversupply??
Cant any excess drivers just be moved to guard duties? If QR has to pay extra for the training and then having to pay those 'temp guards' driver wages as a result then so be it.....better to be safe(at a slightly extra cost) than sorry......

[tazzer9]

My big question is why it takes so long to become a driver for QR, when one of the main arguments for hiring from guard positions is to reduce to the time to train the driver. 

Other networks run more complex systems with a greater variety of rollingstock and still manage to train external hires much faster than QR.

[ozbob]

Is the lack of ATP a factor?

[#Metro]

My big question is why it takes so long to become a driver for QR, when one of the main arguments for hiring from guard positions is to reduce to the time to train the driver. 

Other networks run more complex systems with a greater variety of rollingstock and still manage to train external hires much faster than QR.

Yes, big question that. Doesn't seem to do what its supporters claim - training actually takes the same or longer.

Mr Strachan did mention in the report that the ' structural undersupply ' of traincrew could lead to trainers being pulled off training schools to

do overtime, and when that happened, that lengthened the training times.

It is also inefficient to do "internal favouritism" recruitment. When a person occupies a vacancy, another vacancy is created from the job that they left.

That 'hole' that they create from leaving usually sits outside the organisation and so the new training costs falls on to the employer that they left. However in internal recruitment, that hole sits inside the organisation so TWO sets training costs fall on the organisation - one for the vacancy filled, and another for the vacancy created by the moving employee.

It increases costs in the end.

[tazzer9]

The goal should be that no overtime is needed to fill the normal weekly timetable.   Have overtime be available for extra services such as special events, covering sick leave and last second sickies, abnormal leave like compassionate or long term service leave and of course covering for daily operational disruptions when shifts go longer than expected.   Having more staff also allows more flexible lifestyles and easier to take certain days off.

[ozbob]

The goal should be that no overtime is needed to fill the normal weekly timetable.   Have overtime be available for extra services such as special events, covering sick leave and last second sickies, abnormal leave like compassionate or long term service leave and of course covering for daily operational disruptions when shifts go longer than expected.   Having more staff also allows more flexible lifestyles and easier to take certain days off.