29.07.16
NR may take training assessment back in-house over safety concerns
There is a possibility that Network Rail may take the audit and assessment of rail skills training back in-house because of concerns that providers are not following safety standards.
The infrastructure owner currently delegates responsibility for assessing and accrediting skills providers on all its Sentinel-related training and assessment programmes to the National Skills Academy for Rail (NSAR).
NSAR recently suspended UK Rail Skills Training (UKRS) after finding that it failed to demonstrate strong procedural processes, managed fatigue and working hours ineffectively, and had incomplete Safe System of Work Packs and training pack verification which was significantly below standard.
UKRS is now seeking an injunction from the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) against the decision.
At a hearing of UKRS’s application on 21 July, Gordon Wignall, barrister for NSAR, said: “We are, one might say, in rather uncharted waters. There is the possibility that Network Rail might choose to take auditing and assessment back in-house.”
Wignall said that Network Rail is “very nervous” about the fact that safety standards at UKRS are being challenged at all, and suggested that they were afraid that there would be “further claims” about other providers.
He added that there was a “real fear” that some licensed providers are “simply accrediting people” and allowing them access to Sentinel Cards without providing any training at all, although this did not necessarily include UKRS.
Wignall also said there was a “likelihood of redundancies” from NSAR’s auditing team if Network Rail does decide to take training auditing and assessment back in-house.
The CAT ruled that the case should be postponed to allow time to decide whether NSAR’s training and assessment auditing decisions are subject to competition law.
Wignall said that because of NSAR’s “great concerns” about safety standards and the risk of Network Rail taking assessment in-house, the next hearing should take place on the earliest dates given, 20 and 21 September.
Tristan Jones, barrister for UKRS, asked why NSAR had already agreed to a postponement of proceedings if it had “genuine concerns”. However, the court ruled that the case should be heard on the later date of 6 October after Jones said UKRS would need the time to prepare its case.
Have you got a story to tell? Would you like to become an RTM columnist? If so, click here.