"Fit for the Future" Training Fiasco

Submitted by Tubeworker on Mon, 04/11/2016 - 13:27

If a large organisation intended to launch a new staffing model, which required thousands of staff to perform new roles, you would think it would think it might put procedures in place to ensure that those staff were equipped and trained to perform those roles before the model was launched.

But not London Underground! Notwithstanding the basic fact that "Fit for the Future", LU's new operating model for station staffing, is a completely unnecessary restructure, motivated by austerity cutbacks rather than anything that will improve the service we provide to passengers, even on the company's own terms the launch has been a farce.

Tubeworker can reveal these shocking statistics which show the full extent of the chaos in terms of staff being trained for their new roles:

  • "Ticket Machine Servicing" training (this is training to equip CSA1s and CSA2s, paid £30k and £23k respectively, to perform complicated cash-handling and machine-floating work that SAMFs were previously paid £36k to carry out): only 12% of all staff who need the training have been trained.
  • Station Familiarisations (obligatory and safety-critical processes to make sure staff can work at new locations, with all the relevant licenses): only 34.8% of staff have been trained. As we reported on 4 April, the lack of adequately familiarised staff has already led to multiple station closures and stations having no step-free access, confirming our fears that "Fit for the Future" would particularly disadvantage disabled passengers.
  • Control Room Familiarisations (staff who previously worked as SAMFs or Supervisors in outer-London stations have been forced into Zone 1 to work as "Customer Supervisors" in the control rooms of busy central London stations, a completely different - and highly stressful - working environment that requires substantial training): just 35.3% of staff have been trained.
  • We at Tubeworker HQ doubt whether many station staff will be rushing to the front of the queue to demand training. "Fit for the Future" has displaced us en masse, and forced us into new, more responsible, and more difficult roles for no extra pay. Why should we make the running to help the company's new model work?

    The chaos proves that improving service was never the company's aim. They wanted to cut jobs and reduce costs. For them, the subsequent mess is presumably a price worth paying.

    For us, it means more stressful working lives and a worse service for passengers. Isn't it time for our unions to launch a new dispute to resist "Fit for the Future"'s chaotic consequences?

    Tubeworker topics