<TBODY> </TBODY> | ||||||||||
|
<TBODY>
</TBODY>
| Foreign train experts recommend "fairly common sense" solutions By Hetty Musfirah | Posted: 09 May 2012 1937 hrs
<TBODY> </TBODY> <TBODY> </TBODY> SINGAPORE: Foreign experts have raised several concerns in the way the train service disruptions in December were managed. One of these concerns was the lack of customer care, as well as the confusion of roles, by SMRT staff. They felt that the command and control structure of SMRT's Rail Incident Management Plan (RIMP) was too complicated. They also felt that the bus bridging services plan can be improved. The experts presented a total of 10 recommendations to the Committee of Inquiry (COI) to tackle the issues concerning incident management. In his testimony on Wednesday, Mr Andrew Barr, who's the Network Operational Planning and Integration Manager of London Underground, said the recommendations are "fairly common sense and not rocket science". He noted the instances during the disruption where more than one person at the stations thought they were in charge. He said the command and control structure should be simplified so that staff at all levels understand their roles during major service disruptions. He cited how London staff are classified under a colour-coding system of gold, silver or bronze - with gold being the highest authority. Mr Barr said this has also been useful in helping emergency personnel understand the different roles of staff. SMRT must have a system of recognising the roles and responsibilities of people involved in an incident. He also noted how it may be unnecessary for someone of higher seniority to take over the job of the station manager, if the station manager is already competent in managing the situation. He said this impacts their level of confidence if service disruptions hit again. Specific timings should also be factored into the tasks set out under the RIMP. Mr Barr said the RIMP can also be simplified, with straightforward flow charts or diagrams to make it easy for staff to understand the situation quickly. Plans for bus bridging services must also be more dynamic. Mr Barr felt the current bus bridging plans are suitable for short service disruptions of between one and three stations, and not major ones like in last December. One suggestion is for the buses to ferry commuters to stations where trains are still operating on other lines. The other expert who testified was Mr Peter Gillens, an operations specialist from Australia. He said it's important to also be honest and clear when giving information to commuters. For example, if there are no bridging buses yet, commuters should be told so that they can make a decision on other alternatives. The experts also felt that SMRT could have provided better care and rapid assistance to commuters, especially for those stuck in the stalled trains. Mr Barr shared how the London Underground teams up with nearby retail outlets to distribute bottled water to commuters. It's also important that vital operational staff dealing with the incidents are not distracted with providing information to other stakeholders. Mr Gillens said there needs to be a specific person who's tasked to disseminate information. The experts also suggested that SMRT develops a system where key staff - especially those who were not involved during the disruption - are aware of the causes and details of the disruptions. They also recommended a re-look at training for crowd control. - CNA/ck <!-- Zone Tag : Channel News Asia In Text <script type="text/javascript"> innity_pub = "66368270ffd51418ec58bd793f2d9b1b"; innity_zone = "12251"; innity_width = "**"; innity_height = "**"; innity_country = "SG"; </script> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://cdn.innity.com/network.js"></script>--> |
<TBODY>
</TBODY>
