Peter Hendy is the one that should be losing his job - not Gareth. Gareth is guilty of nothing more than speaking the truth, and I, along with many others i should imagine, will agree that Euston can be very unsafe at times when you have hundreds, if not thousands of people swarming to a gate due to a very late call. Obviously Peter Hendy is more concerned that such news could look bad for him personally. It is that sort of 'bully boy' behaviour we should be assigning to the past - not talented engineers like Gareth who was simply saying what he's seen with his own eyes. Does not matter who he shares his views with, if a senior engineer like Gareth says that there is a problem, sacking him is not the appropriate way of dealing with the situation.
“Dennis is a prolific consultant. Please check whether we have (I know we have) and or are currently employing him, as we should stop” “How do we deal with him?” These comments are in the public domain, and they speak for themselves. Hendy pushed Systra for disciplinary action. “Blunt” is a considerable understatement. These are obviously veiled threats, and the complete lack of examination of this power imbalance is embarassing. This man should be nowhere near public office.
We went much further than just saying they were blunt, but thank you for at least taking the trouble to listen. We never claim to be the only people who are right on anything issue, whatever it is. And we totally respect that others have different point of views on many things.
@@GreenSignals But you suggested that no one pushed for Gareth's dismissal - "Please check whether we have (I know we have) and or are currently employing him, as we should stop" is a fairly strong recommendation to Systra, along with the other public domain information that 'future business' could be at risk.
35:23 "I have not seen any evidence that he or anybody at network rail said sack that person" v "Please check whether we have (I know we have) and or are currently employing him, as we should stop” Does "We should stop employing him" mean "sack that person"???
During 40 years working in the railway industry, the 2 most blatant examples of high-level corruption I ever saw were from Network Rail and Transport for London. The worst level of corporate cowardice at a board level was from one of the private companies, whereby a colleague was blatantly mistreated and the other board members all looked at their feet and pretended they hadn't seen anything occur. Once you get up the food chain, the levels of bullying and cronyism grow exponentially. Throw in political maneuvering, and you have the explanation for what happened here. Hendy deserves to be called out, as does the boss of Systra
Welcome...to the machine. some sad, messy, and unfortunate outcomes. Politics (both internal work and external public), Management (project, and engineering), and Engineering can _clash_ .
Ironic that this news has come out in the week of the publication of the Grenfell report. Always report safety concerns as long as you don't embarrass anyone important. Maybe Gareth should have used more diplomatic language but, as far as I can see, he was not speaking on behalf of his employer and he was relying on his experience as a railway engineer not any information specifically obtained from his employment with Systra (in which case he would be in breach of confidentiality). Euston is probably Britain's most widely used station and here is an engineer expressing concern for the travelling public (i.e. you and me) and he is dismissed for 'Gross Misconduct'.
You're dancing on a pinhead here gents. The letter from Peter Hendy is a disgrace and clearly threatens Nick Salt with loss of business from Network Rail and their wider supply chain. There is absolutely not doubt about that and for you to suggest otherwise is disgraceful on your part. From the emails in the public domain Hendy clearly instructs people that Gareth is not to be employed on NR contracts. It's clear that the pressure on Salt from Hendy was extreme. The man is clearly and bully and used his position to punch down. You even accept yourselves that Hendy is a bully and has form for this type of behaviour. Such a person is unsuitable to hold public office needs to go.
Well, i think it's a bit OTT to say 'disgraceful' but equally Richard, we support the right of everyone to have their own view on anything - we would never say ours is better than anyone else's Thank you for taking the trouble to listen to what we had to say. That is appreciated.
I don't agree that NR can't make Systra do anything. Surely, the pressure of potentially losing business with their (presumably) biggest client would be enough to panick any business. IMO they took the threat of lost business seriously and acted on it immediately. I think Systra failed Dennis here- they needed to call out this threat rather than succumbing to it, as difficult as that may have been. Thanks for the pod, another interesting one.
Interesting for me that it does not appear that Network Rail reached out to The Independent newspaper and asked for a correction, which would have been the normal way for NR to respond to a safety concern raised in the media in order to reassure passengers and staff. They could have cited the ORR safety notice that had been closed. Instead they went for the man, not the ball. It seems likely to me that ORR are going to receive a lot more letters about safety at Euston, which is the only station I know where the platform for a train is often announced close to departure time, and well after the information is available to those in the know. With long ramps down to the platforms at Euston, there is space to move the waiting passengers in a more orderly way to the head of the platform until the train is ready to be boarded, in the way that low cost airlines board planes before the plane is ready for boarding.
yes. And in March 2024 the Young Rail Professionals (YRP) annual had Gareth Dennis as night host and was separately awarded on their stage. How is this _not_ a mess ? How can innovative engineering bravely advance and move forward, without being cancelled ?
Gents, Peter Hendy’s comment re. procurement wasn’t merely ill-judged and open to interpretation. Applying the natural meaning of the words, it reads like a direct threat and the decision to dismiss Gareth Dennis ought to be viewed in that context. In stressing - quite rightly - the importance of the process for reporting safety concerns but failing to discuss what looks like a threatened breach of process in terms of procurement, you seem to be applying a double standard.
I genuinely don't see the double standard here Duncan, but I do appreciate you taking the time to listen to what we had to say and fully accept that there are differing views. Hopefully there will be lessons learned on all sides.
@@OlanKenny If I may offer an answer from sobering past experience, (and someone who supports Gareth on Patreon), the lesson would be always keep your natural passion in check and choose your words very carefully when speaking on the record. All it needed, as Nigel said, was the word "potential" in front of "safety".
@@GreenSignals Thanks for the reply. To clarify, my point is that, just as there’s a proper process to be followed in respect of reporting safety issues, so there is regarding disciplinary and procurement matters. Taken at face value, PH’s intervention is deeply problematic in respect of both of these, going well beyond merely registering a complaint, as he was entitled to do, and having clear potential to influence outcomes. I genuinely don’t see any other reasonable interpretation and terming his action merely as ill-judged, for me, doesn’t cover it.
@@duncanbrodie810 _maybe_ there is a legal matter here ? I am from across the pond and unsure; however, in the UK there may be a lawyer, solicitor, barrister, or MP that could look into this sad affair ? both Gareth and Peter are so dedicated to their cause which are truely the same, so could be legally confusing. Both working for the same goals ! What has happened does not seem fair.
Guys: Isn't safety the primary issue? Speaking of "a stampede for a train" is perhaps a more serious condemnation of NR, Euston and passenger flow than calling it unsafe, As NR's number one remit is safety, surely Hendy could find better uses for his time than to wreak revenge on someone, inside or outside the industry, who considers that the users of Euston are at risk.
yes safety. And level boarding. And access. And capacity. And compatibility, train design and platform design...and overcrowding and number of carriages. It all adds up. Reasonably practible updates or upgrades are probably difficult and expensive; hence, politics and heroes.
"Network Rail can't make Systra do things, that's an employment issue for them" Which ignores the power imbalance in that interaction... while they can't directly... that relationship is certainly one where indirect pressure can be applied. Aka "Deal with him"
Very very disappointed by both your takes on this issue. Hendy made a gross misstep in blackmailing a private company. That alone should be damming enough, yet its also centred around safety. The fact that you think this behaviour is acceptable or forgivable is embarrassing and disappointing for you two.
"Wilfully" naive is pretty strong. But, equally we absolutely respect everyone's right to form their own opinion. We have never said (and never will) that our opinions on things are better than anyone else's.
Gareth should have chosen his words more careful, agreed. But you are letting Hendy off far too lightly. His emails to Systra were coercive and an abuse of power. Full stop. The fact that he never explicitly called for Gareth to be sacked is immaterial. It is akin to a mobster pointing out what lovely kneecaps you have; the threat is all the more powerful by being left implicit. Even if Hendy was not not seeking to have Gareth sacked (and it sounds to me like he was) he should have been aware of the weight of his words, especially given his persistent personal intervention. It would appear that Systra (cowardly, but quite understandably) interpreted this as a threat and acted accordingly. Neither of them come up smelling of roses, but Hendy's missteps are far worse than Gareth's. Not only is the underlying error greater, but someone in Hendy's position simply has a far greater responsibility and obligation of care. I don't think Hendy needs to resign. But I do think he needs to give a public apology and take steps to ensure that Gareth is not hampered in future employment in the industry. A further point: I also think you muddy waters by talking so much about whistleblowers. Whistleblowing is about uncovering misdeeds. Gareth's message is more of a difference of opinion about a technical policy matter, namely the appropriate balance of safety and expense. You can disagree with his opinion (as I frequently do) but his point is not unreasonable. We are all better off if knowledgeable people are allowed to express their opinions freely. Yes, he should have said it more carefully, but we should be alarmed when knowledgeable people are being discouraged from sharing their opinions.
An easy solution for Hendy is another email to Salt as minister advising him to retract the dismissal & follow due process resulting in a final warning & retraining on handling the media. Newspapers are forever ringing unfortunate quotes from people without pointing out the possible consequences.
Sometimes I wonder how parts of the rail industry and DfT take some safety matters. I raised chronic overcrowding and by overcrowding I mean people literally unable to move , stood on top toes and crammed onto a train only to be dismissed by that Northern Trains and DfT immediately with the line and people aren’t guaranteed a seat and should be expected to stand. So there is frustration that parts of the industry aren’t listening, are taking a stock answers approach and being defensive rather than addressing genuine concerns. For this reason I can understand Gareth’s comments whilst appreciating his position. The ORR response to my complaint about serious and consistent overcrowding was that it was due to short formation of trains but that is was up to Northern to take this up with DfT. They never addressed any safety concerns with regards to this. It could be addressed in my part of the world with simple ticket acceptance between Grand Central and Northern, one running overcrowded trains up Durham coastline the other running nearly empty trains beyond Hartlepool to Sunderland. A simple solution that falls on deaf ears as the train operators, DfT and Network Rail do nothing but simply dismiss concerns raised by the public, even those with sensible suggestions.
There are two issues here. The employment procedure one, and the conduct of a minister in a role linked to the post to which he has been appointed. I agree with Richard on the employment issue. The mitigation for Systra is that they were between a rock and a hard place. The head of what is (I'd guess) their overwhelmingly largest client has put pressure on them to "deal firmly" with an employee, in default of which their business is toast. Bluntly, if Gareth Dennis did not take the pay-off and good reference, it would cost them far more than even an exemplary award in an Industrial Tribunal if they did not dismiss him. For the head of a nationalised body with safety responsibilities to threaten a consultancy in this way is simply wrong. For that person to remain a minister cannot be right. There will be a lot of justifiable hand-wringing in the building safety industry about Grenfell after the report published yesterday. But Rydon could have said that the works were designed by qualified consultants and had appropriate approvals. There will be a continuing risk that a combination of circumstances will occur at Euston resulting in a loss of life, and it will now look as if NR simply ticked a box and took no further action. Just like the Westminster Council officers who would have checked their file when the tenants complained, seen approvals in place and thought "job done".
I think you're being far too forgiving/deferential to Hendy. He made it crystal clear that GD had to be fired or no more business would come SYSTRA's way. I don't care if he has a title, he should not be allowed to get away with threats and ruining a career. You only have to look at the Post Office to see that this kind of thinking infects every business, and as long as the rancid class/honours/old boys network persists, nothing will change. If a professional makes a complaint, or if I make a complaint as a user of a service then both should be taken seriously, and independent bodies should investigate asap. Hendy needs to be removed, and Dennis re-instated. On a nicer note, watched a couple of short vids yesterday of bridge 27 at Haworth being removed. Hoping to see more of the progress over the next few weeks.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion - fully respect that - but please be assured we will never be deferential to anyone. Fair to everyone, yes, irrespective of who or what they are, but never deferential (assuming we are going with the definition of that being "polite submission". Haworth is a magnificent undertaking isn't it! Once the work is complete, we'll chat to James about what has been done there. It deserves wide recognition.
Another excellent episode! Really, I see this issue as having been blown massively out of proportions at multiple points. When that article came out, from what I remember, it was a one-off article and I don't recall it causing much of a stir. As a result, this could've easily been dealt with by an NR spokesperson seeking simple clarification on the article from Systra, Gareth is told by his employer to tone it down, lessons learnt. I don't get at all why someone as senior as Hendy would feel such a need to get involved and write such a strongly worded letter when I doubt there was much (if any) notable backlash against NR from the article. Someone of his position is there to take such actions if the reputation of Network Rail is severely threatened and this article didn't seem to get anywhere near that.
yes, this is sadly "shoot the messenger" and .... Welcome to the machine; these comments which may be over the top but many may think about and form their own views. This topic just went to the top very quickly in a ruthless way (perhaps because of the sensitivity to level boarding expenses, platform designs, and safety issues). The reasonably practible expenses to "improve" level boarding and safety that is just adequate impacts many.
Gareth speaks an individual and member of the public, not representing Systra. Systra has no business telling him to "tone it down". And NR has no business going to Systra with absurd questions about the opinions of a private citizen.
Overall I think you did a good and fair job ona challenging topic there. The one area I would disagree on is where you let Hendy off the hook. You criticised his last sentence but described it as "being open to misinterpretation. I think the reasonable person would read it just one way, as a clear threat. And when we learn about the detail of Gareth's progress from suspension to dismissal for gross misconduct, it is clear to the reasonable person that Systra felt under some kind of extreme pressure. Whether that means Hendy should be dismissed, I think probably not, just as you agree Gareth should not have been; but you can see why Gareth's supporters feel a sense of gross unfairness. Surely this whole thing should have been handled quietly and in a mediated way? Even now, somebody should step in and say to Gareth and Hendy, "you've both messed up, now let's fix this, learn lessons; and if Gareth concedes he mis-spoke - as Nigel says if only he's used the word "potentially"- reinstate him.
@GreenSignals I think really peter Hendy should come out and put his argument across. He really handled gareths words poorly but I do wonder did the media try and twist gareths words errand if so Hendy should have stopped for a moment had a cuppa
The tragedy is that I feel fairly sure that two prominent pro-rail people like Peter Hendy and Gareth Dennis probably agree 90% about what things should be like in an ideal world (though maybe not on how to get there)
@@ricktownend9144 100%. If management only knew what they were scrapping and sacking, and the total loss. Without engineering heroes there are only average and many times failing projects. Successful innovation usually is created by heroes or luck with little grey area in between.
Interesting discussion this week. Not sure you are right that pressure was not put on to sack Gareth. The fact it was so speedy is very suspicious. Looks like a witch hunt to me based on one word - unsafe. The attitude of Peter Hendy was unexpected and very scary. The shadow announcement was odd but any announcement at all is a good thing. Great work on that new bridge by the volunteers.
Thanks as ever Allan. Not sure re your first point that's exactly what we said but I take your point, as usual it's fairly made. As for SGBR, yes, there is an argument that any announcement is positive!
The one point I disagree with you is that Systra couldn't be coerced into firing Gareth It was made clear to them in no uncertain terms that they fire Gareth or they wouldn't recieve any further contract ls from NR until they had done so.... While Systra don't come out of this smelling of roses it does appear they were placed between a rock and hard place When you see the email chains while it's not 100% explicit that Hendy wants Gareth fired it's absolutely crystal clear that is what he means
Recent visot to Euston noted seating on the concourse but they are positioned so you cannot see the new departure boards which are good but the boards are the wrong way round for passengers to see from the seats
Good episode, nice compiling and telling of the Hendy Dennis saga, too late now but surely Network Rail could've agreed to let it slide just this once? They must know that Gareth is just bluntly outspoken and not malicious I don't think it's fair to call Haigh's statement weird as she did say in April that she would instruct the creation of SGBR, which you could see as laying the keel with crew choice to come later It is nice to see continued innovation at Newton Aycliffe but I think battery trains let government off the hook from investment in proper electrification while they continue to spend billions on unnecessary motorways under the Thames Look forward to next weeks episode
Hendy doesn't come across as someone who takes criticism well and his reaction seems more ego-driven than thoughtful, considering Gareth isn't on his level it's like he's saying "who is this upstart?" This type of attitude in that department wont foster open discussion for critique to create a healthy working environment and no one in practice, is going to make anonymous suggestions or complaints on a regular basis in terms of how the department is being ran unless there's real accountability. Gareth was perhaps a little naïve in that he isn't as slippery and 'political' as many are in institutions at that level public or otherwise, to realise how his words can be capitalised to their own advantage and work against him
so odd too, since Hendy was (is ) such a rail fan and would pop-up at many online YT events such as "All the Stations" with Geoff and Vicki. Hendy was all over that fantastic public relations show for UK rail circa 2017. Hendy now and how turned ? Engineering is such a difficult job that can quickly become too political, sharp, and corrosive for calm debate and relaxed conversations. Engineers have to 'hold back' too many times (sometimes daily) to save their own jobs while still improving their systems. There are various and similar heroes among us. Management needs honest and level headed engineering. Engineers need to be contained at times by management. Bickering and fighting can be destructive and corrosive in the rail family. It is no wonder we can _all_ fail at times...and not be 'perfect' all the time. Homo sum.
Hmmmh, the aircraft industry use the Swiss cheese model of causation. Saying if there are multiple train delays thus preventing the release of queuing customers away from an already heaving Euston station makes one wish that such a safety engineer would have been handy at Hillsborough. Perversely whistleblowing about the lack of maintenance and cleaning staff on the morning of the Kings Cross fire would have similar implications, it most certainly didn’t work for Grenfell Tower and they did have an equivalent of Mr Bates in the residents liaison group. Peter Hendy should perhaps have broader shoulders and demonstrated in a 1-2-1 where and when the proposed interventions had been applied, stopping customers entering the station entirely including the retail space should have made headlines, especially in the Evening Standard.
I appreciate your very fair assessment, but I'd question further the original issue. Whether Euston is 'safe' or not the situation there is unacceptable. The "Euston Dash" was featured in a Radio 4 programme last Monday. A totally uncivilised way to start each journey. Is this going to carry on till HS2 opens? Gareth was entirely right to point up the issue. I'd question whether whistleblowing through official confidential channels achieves anything. What changed at Euston between it needing improvement and being pronounced 'safe'? Some box ticking? Certainly nothing that the radio programme noticed, nor friends & family who go there regularly.
Thanks for the comments Julian. I think we'd all agree that Euston needs work, but there is a big difference between something feeling unpleasant and uncomfortable and being of concern to the regulator as 'unsafe' and I think that's the important distinction here.
Before I retired I used to commute in and out of Euston. By far the worst station in London. I used to hate loath and detest being forced to go to the main concourse to see whether my Watford train was going from the suburban platforms or one of the other platforms. And why did they ever only know 5 minutes before departure which platform it was going from then have to fight, and I mean fight, my way across the concourse to get to the right platform. The fact that Hendy ran Network Rail says it all.
Really enjoyed the breakdown of the Hendy situation, although I personally have to disagree and say he has quite a large role to play here, from threatening Systra with no business if they fire him, to his actions having potential negative impacts on safety and even public trust in the railway - after all, it doesn't look good to public when someone who says something is unsafe gets fired for it, especially without context. Everyone here has played their part in this, whether that be Gareth not thinking through his claims on the matter, Systra dismissing him, but especially Hendy threatening and bullying Systra into making them fire him. And yes, while he was employed by Systra and in theory no one else can force them to do anything, with Network Rail being a major part of their business and him threatening to drop them so to speak, that'd certainly be plenty of intimidation to make them panic and act irrationally.
Thanks for the comments and for watching the show. We totally accept that others will feel differently on such a divisive issue - we simply gave our view as we saw it. You've hit the nail on the head here - everyone has played their part in this.
Gareth wont be the last too honest engineer to be burned by the media. Peter Hendys best course would have been to offer him a job! Gareth was clearly advocating for a full rebuild of Euston for HS2 - which must be in doubt at this time. We also need someone with Peter Hendys drive and detrmination at the DfT to push against the road lobby.
@@anthonypowell5665 hence "messy", as over time there are too many games played out by notional lazy and unthinking decision makers. Generally they just want a fast exit without leaving a "mark"....while the concrete hardened years ago on many engineering topics (e.g. level boarding and access); so, work politics. Ageless topics like level boarding and resulting slow boarding get thrown into this mix and possibly impact careers.
@@GreenSignals I wonder if the DfT is in a very stressful battle to completely re justify HS2 with the Treasury at the moment. Let alone 2a. Dont forget who is running this government, an ex BoE politician very much calling the shots due to the £20bn ‘black hole’ Hence Hendys reaction to Gareth bad publicity?
@@GreenSignals A station built in my lifetime, not like all the others built in the 19th century, needs to be completely rebuilt. If they paid a little bit less attention to building retails sites and more time on getting passengers on and off trains might help. Still with HS2 finishing at Old Oak Common most of the retail outlets will go out of business.
Really disappointed with your rather naive take that the words used by Hendy are subject to misinterpretation. From what is available in the public domain it is very clear that there was intent to target Gareth and get him dismissed. I worry about a society where people like Hendy are rewarded with influential roles and allowed to continue unpunished. Hendy should not be in such position. I also have to wonder why are you accepting that NR has the right to question Systra about Gareth's comments. Gareth spoke as a private individual, representing his own personal views as a citizen, a technically qualified one but still a private citizen. As he often does for several media channels, as an interviewee and as a writer, and in his own RU-vid channel. Very obviously not in representation of his employer at all. Network Rail and Hendy have no business going to Systra asking if Gareth was representing the company when he clearly wasn't and threatening to punish the company for the views of its employees. I do agree that Gareth should have been more careful with the wording. If you're a member of the general public and you read something like that in a newspaper and it comes attributed to an expert, you would be scared to use Euston and that impacts NR. But the right course of action would be to contact the Independent and ask to publish an answer, or at the extreme contact Gareth directly.
I suspect that on your first para we may simply have to disagree. With your second para, I think it's clear cut - anyone in a position of responsibility and knowledge in a sector can't be treated as simply a private citizen. Their words carry more weight, whether they like it or not.
I traveled to and from Euston station earlier this week the concourse was a crowed and pretty unpleasant experience. On the plus side I traveled on a class 730 emu which I was impressed with .
One thing to explain your confusion at the rapidity of the settlement offer… Settlement agreements are not based on evidence. The company is buying the employees rights (whatever those may be) out, and so it doesn’t require evidence. “We’re not vibing, would you like some money to quit”. The rapidity of that offering clearly shows that they wanted him off the books quickly, and without an investigation. When he didn’t accept that offer, the only route was the formal investigation and the dismissal.
But why would they move so quickly to get rid of an employee who is apparently very good at his job? As a former recruiter I know that any idiot can fire someone, but replacing them with someone better is damn hard. I agree with others; something or someone caused them to lose their faculties a bit.
I understand that - have done many, many settlement agreements. The fact the possibility of a settlement was arrived at so quickly could indicate a number of possible scenarios. One point - whilst I agree that rejection of an offer meant that investigation was inevitable, there's no presumption of anything else at that point - depends on what the investigation finds.
@@thegareth yes. Technically if Euston was not specifically part of the article and it was just a general topic then it would probably not have done as much damage. My opinion is that management does both project (finance, progress, etc.) and engineering (keeping everything smoothly flowing among a bazillion issues). If management is made public by the press then it quickly becomes political and severe results can occur....then engineering can be grist for the machine, and then managements bury the story. NR office before 2008 was at 40 Melton Street, Euston....so maybe that is why there was such high Euston / Hendy sensitivity, with sharp and dire outcomes.
Really disappointed here about your frankly refusal to take Hendy to task. Dennis has obviously made a mistake and i fully agree *some* discipline was appropriate just not firing. However hendy made a veey very obvious threat to systra and ignoring that is irresponsible as railway communicators IMO.
Thanks - do appreciate you a) listening to what we had to say as thoroughly as you have and b) being balanced in your comments as well. Totally take the point that there are different perspectives on all these issues.
@GreenSignals I'm a listener from New Zealand (excellent podcast, keep it up). I didn't know much about this before your podcast and neither do I know of either of the key people involved, however as an engineer I strongly agree with the vast majority of comments here regarding you letting the now-minister off the hook for a frankly outrageous final paragraph in his letter. Your responses on here to people pointing out this failure, seem to be always be "thanks for your comment, we know people have different opinions on things...". I really hope you reconsider your position taking on board this feedback (mostly from fellow railway people I'd guess) and discuss it further next week, rather than brush it off as a difference of opinion. There is no shame in changing your mind on something. Or do you have some conflict of interest in criticising the minister more strongly?
When the Taff Vale Railway was built Merthyr Tydfil was the biggest Town and Cardiff was just a village in comparison to Merthyr Tydfyl that's why the line is up Direction towards Merthyr Tydfyl and it was almost Became a City.
This is very sad and avoidable. Clearly Gareth should have tempered his comments as Nigel says with the words "potentially" or evan said that in my humble opinion... However, as a former union rep, I like most know how this works and cleaerly, future business from Network Rail has influenced the disciplinary procedure which although inevitable, is also very sad. As was said, this was an individuals career on the line. An appeal at a tribunal is of course an option but, only 5% of these result in jobs being reinstated and IMO it wont make it to the tribunal as the employer, again no doubt under varying pressures, will do all they can to "settle on the steps" and avoid at all costs this going to tribunal. It then would take a massive set of kahunas on Gareths part to resist all financial offers as a settlement at this stage. Just my 2 penneth worth. Did Hendy influence the process in his final paragraph? We all know the answer there, sadly.
If you say something is unsafe then it is so in every state in which it can exist.. If something is potentially unsafe, it may or may not be depending on the particular circumstances as well as the mitigation / control measures being applied with respect to those circumstances.
@@GreenSignals That makes sense. Tightrope walking is inherently insafe. However, by introducing the control measure of a safety net you make it potentially unsafe. So, the argument boils down to the adequacy of the control measures.
Indeed it's clear to anyone who uses Euston regularly that in normal circumstances it isn't fundamentally unsafe... It certainly has the potential to become unsafe however once there is significant disruption. Whether the control measures that have been added since the improvement notice are effective or not remains to be seen
Very interesting episode. Leaving aside who said what to whom, and who shouldn't have said anything(!), it is though worth bringing up the disaster that is Euston, whether 'safety' is a factor or not. OK it's better than it used to be now that a lot of the concourse retail has been removed, but I've always thought that the ramps are by far the worst things. They should have built the concourse at track level, but presumably couldn't because of the Tube station underneath, but what they could have done and still could do is create a gateline ON the concourse! The trouble now is that as soon as trains are announced, many folk panic as they know that it is not merely a walk across the concourse that is required, it's a mad dash down a damn ramp to the platform in order to guarantee getting their train! Psychologically if there was a gateline on the concourse, then folk would feel more relaxed, despite the ramp. If they could just get beyond a managed gateline to ensure that they would still get their train, such panic would be reduced. And if space is an issue, simply build outwards at the front of the station, which is currently just open air seating of questionable value. And a mainline station built with too few escalators down to the Tube from its very opening, and still not having increased the number over 50 years later, not to mention making the entrance/exit to it OUTSIDE the mainline station, is really not good enough.
I have genuinely never considered that - the possibility of a gateline on the concourse. I suspect it's because of the end to end corridor that runs perpendicular to the concourse before the platform ramps. But interesting thought!
Loving the Green Signals Podcasts... congrats! A question for the team (unrelated to this week's episode!). With the East Coast gradually switching over to ERTMS as part of the East Coast Digital Programme (ECDP), do we think we'll ever get to see 140 mph running on the east coast mainline? (given that limitations with existing signalling systems is often cited as one of the key reasons why line speeds have never increased beyond 125 mph, despite InterCity 225 trains, Class 801s, etc, being capable of it).
Thanks guys for yet another incisive episode. I agree with your analysis; Gareth has been very hard done by. More to come I feel sure. But yes, Hendy's letter was inappropriate. The whole thing as a feel of Henry II's poorly judged comments about Thomas Beckett.
A very thoughtful and sensible discussion. Sorry to see that Gareth's extra curricular activities have led to this but somewhere along the line he needed to take a step back. I hope he gets a new role quickly.
Forgive me if I have got this wrong but whilst NR is the Duty Holder overall, the problem with the 'surge', i.e. passengers rushing across the concourse (because they are on the 'wrong' side) plus the '200m sprint' down the ramp, is generally because the intended train's platform, mostly Avanti but not exclusively so, is announced 5 min or less before departure. The rush not helped by exhortation to passengers to board early as train doors will be closed at least a minute before departure! So NR is in an unenviable position, having to deal with problems largely of the TOCs making. Frequently the Pendolino will be announced as 'being prepared' 15-20 mins before scheduled departure only for the platform to be displayed only a few minutes before the train should leave. Whilst I appreciate tasks such as cleaning are not desirable with passengers boarding, just waiting for the catering staff or driver/guard to appear before boarding would seem unnecessary if the crew is confirmed 'on its way'. I have experienced this many times and the late notification also contributes to delayed departures. Thus I can understand Peter Hendy's possible frustration where Gareth has 'gone public' on NR but doesn't seem to appreciate the different roles. I am also not sure about him being credited as an 'experienced' engineer when it seems he has spent 'only' around 10 years in the industry (😊). Many time-served railwaymen and women know you always learn throughout your career. It seems Gareth likes to position himself on a virtual pedestal to share his views but doesn't always understand the real consequences of firing off without being really aware of all the parties and their roles. I think Peter may have been ill-advised to react in the way he did, but when NR are trying to mitigate a problem, not really of their own making, one could perhaps understand the reaction. Correct me if I have got this wrong but from my experience of Euston, Avanti has more to answer on this!
When I stopped commuting into Euston it had become London North Western. With that company and the predecessor I could never never understand why they couldn't announce the departing platform more than 5 minutes in advance and half the time it was from platforms 8, 10 or 11 so why the hell did I need to be on the concourse anyway.
Why are trains being built at all different heights.. eg the newish CAF 195s are very high. Unfortunately I'm getting older and the old Lincoln bound platform at Gainsborough Lea Road is a big step down. Needs a Harrington Hump. I'm sure old BR had a standard network height. I am aware the GWR turbos are out of gauge on other regions. Surely there should be one height by now. I hear The Elizabeth line at the new Old Oak station is already an issue. I wonder if there is any stats on this?
Level boarding is really vitally important. Not good enough that we are still in this position in 2024. Don't know for certain about a BR standard height but someone out there will definitely know.
It appears Gareth may have put himself into a difficult position. However I do think the power imbalance needs to be recognised when reviewing that Network Rail letter, as clearly it is very open to interpretation. You do wonder if Dennis has got under Hendy skin for him to write such an ill judged letter. Always best to play the ball, not the man. I also wonder what it says about the culture of network rail.
I spoke to NR official channels when I found out as a contractor I was being paid via a 3rd party company I was forced to deal with by NR, whose finance office was based in Moscow in 2022 after the war started. And NR was made aware before forcing people to use this 3rd party company. And I was fired for raising an ethical and moral objection for channelling public funds via Moscow...
Good Lord! If you have documentation that stands that up, a serious journalist would be very interested in that story (perhaps not the one at the Indy that published the comments from Gareth). I would say the FT would be interested, and they would be a safe pair of hands. That's a matter of national public interest.
@richardhunt4255 the 3rd party company involved (based in the USA!) gave a sorry not sorry appology to NR about still working on de russifying the business all be it nearly 10 months by this point after the war started. I have all the documentation and emails, but it doesn't say much. NR incompetency didn't look into the issue, 3rd party company removed the problem i.e. me complaining, and everyone else didn't say a word for fear of getting fired like I did. The real story is the reason all the contractors moved payment and contracts to start with was to get them off the headcount to protect them from redundancies being made at the time!
@@rafchris Ah OK. Why was their finance office based in Moscow? Did the company have significant business in Russia, which it was trying to get out of (that admittedly has been difficult for many well-known companies)
@richardhunt4255 the parent company in question is based in the US but has very little operations in Europe so they bought another company to run their consultancy through that was run by a Russian oligarch and was based out of Moswcow yes. Said oligarch has now fled to Switzerland with his cash and whats left of the company. But funilly enough my new "line manager" st this 3rd party company I didnt work for but did pay my invoices was based in Kiyv but had to run payroll through the companies global finance centre in Moscow..... I am guessing that lead to some awkward phone conversations! Certainly lead the UK end of the company squiming when they found out their own company ran cash through Moscow. For most IT contractors at NR, their timesheets are still signed off by a guy in Kyiv with a laptop and an internet connection while the US company pockets sometimes up to 100 quid per day per contractor for the privilege of doing a timesheet once a month and running them through their tax payroll for IR35 purposes. Again I did say I can fix your Russian problem and save you hundreds of pounds a day in fees if you want to employ me or my company directly but not interested as it would be too much effort....
Hello from us all at The Independent Brigg Line Rail Group. Excellent show as always. A few points. 1. One of our members had to use Euston recently after the east Coast Main Line failed again, and it was physically impossible to get on a train at St Pancras to return back to Yorkshire. They had to go to Euston to change at Tamworth to catch a cross-country service to Yorkshire. Their feedback is that the station was exceptionally busy and did feel unsafe and the mass running down to the platforms to catch their train was unacceptable. 2. On another personal note, IBLRG has reported issues with a redesign of stairs to Platform 3/4 at Sheffield Midland station to both EMR and the ORR due to crushing at peak times, this is due to poor signage on the stairs, despite this nothing has been done, it seems to be that it takes an accident to happen before people listen.
Thanks for your support first of all. Much appreciated. But also thanks for your comments on Euston. Yes, there is much still to do and as we said, we don't like the place either. The Dutyholder's responsibilities are clear - it is vital they ARE held to account by the regulator
Safety is relative. No doubt Euston station is very safe, if you compared the risk to that of driving, for example. An overcrowded station is nonetheless less safe than one that is not overcrowded, however many times the risk is assessed or additional safety procedures added to the rule book. Engineering is all about balancing the risks and benefits of different courses of action: safety, cost, quality, capacity, speed, comfort, ecology, &c. An engineer has the right to contribute to the public debate with an informed view as to the best solution to such an optimisation problem. That said, it was certainly unwise for Dennis to put such a comment on record to the media, knowing that a general comment about safety could be interpreted instead as a statement of imminent danger. Peter Hendy was absolutely wrong to threaten Systra, and that is indeed what he did. The letter is written plainly and the meaning is clear. He should resign, or at the very least apologise and submit his behaviour for an independent investigation. Systra was wrong to fire Dennis, but this is unavoidable when your major client instructs you to do so. I would not have expected any firm in such a position to do otherwise. Though they were in the wrong to fire him, their behaviour otherwise appears reasonable. They have not attempted to deceive Dennis or the public about this matter and while they could have stood up for their employee, to do so would have been a courageous decision and hurt their other employees.
This was a superb piece on the Dennis/Hendy issue, thank you. Well researched, helpfully assembled, logically argued, and objective. It would make a great training video in its own right as a top-level example of how to carry out an effective disciplinary investigation.
@@GreenSignalsnot sure what is being meant by turning point in this post. Trains arriving from the valley lines via Cardiff Queen Street coming into Cardiff Central do so in the down direction and are pointing towards the country end of the station as are any trains coming from the East via the GWML.
Here’s a link to the Additional Resources page on our website to find the links we mention: www.greensignals.org/green-signals-episode-49-additional-resources/
If the wires between Crewe and Weaver are replaced Liverpool can get its extra train per hour. The city is greatly under-served. Dennis, it looks like he witnessed the mad dash at Euston when the platform for the Liverpool train is announced. Hendy is aware that the wires need upgrading and the WCML made four track between Windsford and Weaver. This needs doing ASAP, not a part of some in the future plan.
Hello all. Don't think you need to worry about the episode (I've just been watching "Raw"). It was excellent. Your investigation into the Euston situation was both informative and authoritative. Richard's conclusions were measured, balanced but clear. Whilst I got the quiz question right, I'm kicking myself that I didn't get the "Welsh answer", as I was born & bred in Aberfan so Merthyr Vale was my nearest station!
Interesting info on HS2 progress. So short sighted not going at least to Crewe? The WCML is near capacity, this would have freed up diagram,s, plus the land has been purchased to Manchester, what a waste!
Level boarding is great when you have it and a literal pain if you haven't. My favourite horror is on the LNWR platforms at Bushey - even a Harrington Hump would struggle to make a difference there.
Many of the comments by others seem to me to based on the view that (a) they don't like to see people fired for what amounts to an error of judgement, and that the comments of the then CEO of Network Rail, not then a minister, are an attempt to bully. My reading is that an employee of a contractor, however well qualified, goes to the press about the affairs of his employer's client, without being an authorised spokesperson of his employer, not apparently any prior consultation with that employer. If I did that, even with innocuous comments, I would expect to be fired. Then the client (Netwolk Rail in this case) realises that their public relations is potentially out of control, and seeks assurance from the contractor that this is a one-off, and that they have procedures in place to prevent recurrance. They add the comment that a contractor without sufficient control of its employees is less likely to be considered for future work. Understandable, I think.
I would love to see the judgement of a lawyer on this. The points I would make are: 1. In the offending article, no mention was made of Gareth's employer and so is it correct to assume that he was acting as a spokesperson for Systra (authorised or not)? 2. The opinions expressed are not necessarily related to his employment. There is no evidence that Gareth had any knowledge of Euston Station other than that in the public domain. 3. Euston station has a tendency for crowding coupled with sudden movements of large groups of people (the 'Euston Dash'). Nigel Harris described this as a 'stampede'. Does describing this state of affairs as 'unsafe' sound over the top? Does making that observation require specialist engineering knowledge? (Remember we are not necessarily talking about a Hillsborough type incident - far more likely that an elderly mobility-impaired individual would be knocked over). 4. Gareth is a fairly well-known person in the rail industry who has appeared before the Transport Select Committee. He is probably better known than Sir Peter Hendy. That the first reaction of Network Rail to his observation was to seek his disciplining rather than to respond to his concerns is not very reassuring to the travelling public.
Love that 'Fully Charged' graphic on the side of the battery train. That's going to look a tad embarrassing when (in a few years, when the batteries are past their best) it grinds to a halt in the middle of nowhere, out of juice. Battery trains are a political expedient to get politicians off the hook of the outstanding need for further electrification. Vince C.
Level boarding is no longer a simple question as different bits of the fractured travel system have implemented different solutions. Elizabeth line has increased some platform heights and so has HS2. Level boarding is critical for the future but we need to maintain some central standards as well to make solutions compatible.
Agreed, but we must try as hard as possible to make it a reality. It should be in 2024 or at least there should be pathway to making it happen in the near future.
Yes, and GD is a very good proponent of rail train / platform level boarding and related topics. Level boarding topics for both commuter and freight rail which may use the same platforms can be highly frustrating, complex, and expensive to "improve". There are many similar platform / train issues on all heritage and new lines as well. Unfortunately once decisions are made, sleepers and rail laid, and cement cures, any reasonably practicable "improvements" are lengthy, expensive, and fraught with management and work politics; picking/allowing the "right" or "best" trains, and which platforms can be run, can be equally daunting. Level boarding reasonably practicable improvements usually for accessibility and safety. Some totally inadequate platforms may be abandoned or scrapped, trains changed or dropped, all these improvements over time (impacts, cost, schedule, etc.). Level boarding is a topic in both the ScotRail section, and also in the Euston / NR / GD / Systra section...and HS2 progress section. For example HS2 trains and plaforms are higher than the UK standard 915mm nominal height.
To be honest, having two standard platform heights is not an insurmountable difficulty. I live in Germany, where there will be two standard heights (probably) forever...a solution that is now in use is to build trains where the doors at one end of the coach offer level boarding for one platform height, and the doors at the other end for the other. The automatic PA system then tells you which set of doors offers level boarding at each station.
@@dkbmaestrorules There are always solutions. When I worked in France some of the Suburban stations had two platform heights in the same station BUT that works with two heights. I think we now have three and many that do not comply to any standards. This is probably not a big issue in Scotland.
More im reading whats out there then listening to you both i think Hendy lost his temper here and reacted out of line but someone should have proof read that letter abd flagged up what his words could come across as. I do wonder if he actually meant it as sack gareth or in heat of the moment sent a letter/email that he should have taken 5 minutes with a cup of coffee abd cooled down instead of sending. Gareth had his faults abd he can go over the top. The main villan here i feel is systra as they were happy for him tp speak out even promoting it then decided to throw gareth under the bus. Think the pay pff included an NDA whoch is one reason gareth might have refusrd it. If gareth was out of line like Hendy in his letter made out if you read between the lines why offer him a pay off. Im prepared to give peter a chance to explain himself although I thi k he needs to have a talking too although thats probably already happened.
The engineer clearly spoke out of turn. However I cant believe your so loathe to accpt that peter hendy was demanding a head. I mean, all the facts point that way including the occurances that had you scratching your heads. I hope im not to cynical but both of you seemed so naive about his words. How would the engineers company be expected to react if their biggest(?) Customer clearly hated the actions of one of their staff? I guess thats why the severance offer took a day to arrive...no investigation nessicary!
Thanks Calvin, and thanks for listening to the show and what we had to say. Your points are well made and as we said, it could well be that the answers are indeed different to what we concluded. Only time will tell, but as many have also said, hopefully lessons (real lessons, not just box ticking ones) will be learnt from this.
Thanks for the well researched piece on the Dennis / Hendy incident. I agree entirely with your conclusions. I do think that Mr Dennis has an overblown sense of his own importance and influence and he should know full well that the last thing anyone in business or industry ought to do is slag off the source of your employer's income. But I still feel a little uneasy at the extent of Lord Hendy's involvement and particularly how little criticism is being levelled at him for the rather extreme reaction in effectively getting GD fired. Cheers, Rob
A little uneasy about the high handed arrogance of a senior official? That's exactly the scenario that causes accidents - the Challenger Space Shuttle, for one.
Any rail professional, especially an engineer, knows the importance of calling the safety card and the weight that it carries. Abusing it carries consequences. But Hendy taking it personally is also unprofessional. A bollocking and a quiet word hinting that Gareth might want to think whether his long term career is is in media or engineering, would seem more appropriate. Gareth was a twat. Hendy got pissed off. Systra had no balls.
You should cover the metro west railway prodject in Details Richard Bristol Temple meads station to pill and Portishead line Charfield for wotton under Edge new station, Ashley Down, Henbury Filton North Henbury line update Wellington Cullompton and Stroudwater all areas of new housing and economy corridor connected to Bristol Bath Taunton weston super mare ,Taunton, Exeter Gloucester central Cheltenham spa
I love that Nigel has such faith in the official whistle-blowing procedures - naivety on stilts. The problem is the cronyism in the Establishment, and it looks like Nigel and Richard are part of it, or would like to be.
Thank you for taking the time to listen to the show. That is appreciated. I have no desire to be part of any establishment - indeed, it is arguably what got me into trouble before! We will always seek to take a balanced and evidenced view. However, totally respect folk's rights to have a different one.
Hi Richard and Nigel I'm not sure if I am wording this correctly but how do the Green Signals team stand if someone in the industry takes exception to their comments and demand that they withdraw them and apologise? I assume that both Richard and Nigel are no longer gainfully employed in the rail sector (apologies if they are) so have no employer to answer to. As a member of the team as well could Stef also be found equally liable for any comments made on the show (as I understand that she is the producer essentially) if she is still gainfully employed in the rail or media industry. Does being in the media, which you all are of course, as opposed to direct rail employment mean that you are not as much at risk from being threatened by your industry contacts in the same way that Gareth has been if they don't take too kindly to your comments? I believe that it is healthy to enable open and honest criticism of any organisation if you believe that things like safety are potentially at risk without fear of legal action or dismissal if the organisation gets annoyed or upset. Apologies if that is convoluted, I seemed to have been struggling to articulate my thoughts unusually. An interesting programme as ever which I now find as essential as Gareth's own excellent RailNatter. Richard I believe I spent a day in your company during the school holidays in 1981 involving class 40s and Retford-Sheffield trips... Best wishes Natalie Jones (ex signaller for BR and GCR- have signalled Nigel's loco a number of times including Tornado during early trials)
@@GreenSignals But it is in your personal interests not to upset Mike Hendy, in case you find that he declines to grant interviews and other official access that would be useful to you.
Thank you giving us impeccable railway news. You have become my weekly railway news round up and I look forward to the next one. Is there any news on the East West Railway line rebuild since I live nearby? I am interested in its progress? Thanks again for such wonderful rowing news. Stay safe.
Nigel, you should get gareth and peter around the table at your pub bang thwir heada together both got some.fault but i.think the main issue here is gareths employers overreacting and.sacking him when as you said a good tellingnoff and an explanation should have been enough
Hendy shot himself in the foot here. Dennia isnt wrong either. Both firms got to take blame here really dropped the ball. No party is innocent. Hendy should have workes with gareth to bang heads at the government so sort euston
Interesting podcast as usual, firstly no employer is going to comment on individual cases, secondly nobody knows what Gareth Dennis's employment record looks like, the fact that his trade union couldn't stop his dismissal suggests to me that there's more to this story than meets the eye. His behaviour since dismissal unfortunately will severely his future employment prospects
Mate, you’re asserting that “no-one knows” about things when you’re clearly only speaking for yourself. Gareth Dennis was hired by Systra less than 2 years ago, which under UK employment law means that a lot of provisions to prevent Unfair Dismissal are exempted. These exemptions were used in this case, as email correspondence between Systra and Mr. Dennis showed, and in a clearly slipshod way in order to get him dismissed as soon as possible after he had refused to take a “plea deal” of a compensation payout, reference and an NDA. If he had been at the company for longer than 2 years, there would’ve been a very clear-cut case of Unfair Dismissal and his union would’ve gone through Systra like a week-old curry. In these circumstances though it is a lot harder for an employee to stop such treatment (read: more expensive). As for his actions afterwards limiting his employment prospects: how do you know? Having integrity is not considered a career-limiting character flaw in the engineering field. In fact, it is insisted upon by the Codes of Ethics that most engineering institutions have in one way or another. Lord Peter Hendy should know too - he’s a Fellow of the Institution of Civil Engineers. ICE have a clause in their Code of Ethics about retaliation over safety matters too, perhaps he needs to do some reading as well…
@@ThermiteBeGiants completely missing point here , this isn't a retaliation over a safety matter. That's where everyone has gone wrong here; it's about misuse of process and media instead of the official channels. None of this would have happened had he stuck to being journalist OR an engineer. Whether his dismissal is fair or otherwise none of us are really in a position to judge. We weren't at the hearing or have any records of past.
The thing is, Gareth is clearly loving it. Hes not stopped tweeting about it. Im not sure dragging up old tweets where hes called Hendy a bus bandit, profiteer. And attacked him multiple times in the past will do him any good in an employment tribunal. Nor suggesting who should replace Hendy is a good idea. Gareth is a corbynista who helped write Corbyns rail manifesto, he has an axe to grind. And from what ive seen him talk about he does believe in compromise or what is politically possible.
biggest issue here is, we don't know what was said in disciplinary hearing. There is such a thing as "fundamental breakdown in trust" which could have been invoked here - were there other instances on file? were there other examples of going "off piste" ? so I don't think you can conclude he "shoudln't have been fired"; personally, I'd take a hugely dim view of someone going to press rather than the company who employs them first. Unfortunately, GD has something of a style of grandstanding, pontificating and having a constant go at people - you reap what you sow sometimes - he's bit of "shock jock" in journalism terms
These comments are all valid, and yet there has been nobody better than Gareth at explaining why we need HS2, to the general public. That is why I support him on Patreon as well as Green Signallers. He's well worth letting him piss inside the tent rather than outside. Skilled management can handle people like Gareth and harness his skills. Peter Hendy doesn't look like someone with those skills.
@@richardhunt4255 Absolutely! GD has the potential to be a great benefit to the development and future success of rail transport in the UK - he needs to be nurtured by a Company and an executive who recognises that the skills GD has are equally matched by some weaker traits. Put in a team, with complementary members, under the guidance of a open minded executive, GD will flourish. The team roles 'Strengths and Weaknesses', described and studied by Dr Meredith Belbin, explain these issues very successfully IMHO.
Your despicable post reads like an article from Pravda. State-sponsored suppression of diverse opinion is a crime against the public. I wish there had been a whistleblower before the Grenfell Fire.
@@Jon.Morimoto yes. However these are all truths at the same time; hence, politics and heroes. In the end of each "successful" project there is a final design which is molded and shaped by budgets, schedules, and a lot of engineering and management meetings and clashes. So then few improves and mostly degrades. Many things are so expensive and difficult to improve. Another sacrifice.
@@Jon.Morimoto lmao😂 buddy it’s too late for that talk now. We collectively sat idly while people were sacked for posts on social media, so why would speaking to the actual media be any different? If you’re not smart enough to speak confidentially, then you can’t complain when they clamp down on you.
