Some train crew members often say that the job is not what it used to be. These words are very true, as Queensland Rail has changed significantly over the years. It might come as a shock to some to realise that workplace change has not only occurred and continues to occur in Queensland Rail, but also in just about every other industry. A simple example of this is with garbage collection. Years ago, the garbage truck would be manned by 3 persons with the collectors entering peoples' yards to empty the bins. Nowadays, with the advent of wheelie bins, the garbage is collected utilising one person.

Community expectations also change over a period time. It is no longer accepted as a done thing to drive a car whilst under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The slaughter on the roads has convinced the mainstream population that car drivers should not be impaired by alcohol or drugs whilst driving. It is accepted that laws that allow for random breath testing are necessary as a deterrent and subsequently provide for a safer environment on the roads.

After a spate of fatalities involving road crashes with buses and semi-trailers, the Traffic Act was amended in Queensland to stipulate that operators of heavy machinery have a zero blood alcohol content. Operators, in the legislation, truck drivers, bus drivers and crane drivers etc..

Due to a number of reasons, businesses and industries have introduced drug and alcohol policies into their workplaces. One of the major reasons for introducing drug and alcohol policies is Workplace Health and Safety. It is fair to say that we all have an expectation of going to work and returning home each day without being injured (or worse) because of an accident at work caused by impairment due to alcohol and drugs.

BHP has had an agreement for sometime now that allows for the random testing of its employees whilst on site.

There are currently 2 pieces of legislation in Queensland that allows for testing of Queensland Rail employees for alcohol and drugs.

The Transport Infrastructure Amendment (Rail) Act 1995, Section 71ZE(1) under the heading,

(1) "Power of authorised person to investigate incident."
This section applies if: -

• a) An incident on or involving a Railway has, or may have, happened; and
• b) An authorised person for the railway is investigating the incident, whether or not at the chief executive's request.

(2) If the authorised person reasonably needs help in investigation the incident, the authorised person may require a person to give the authorised person reasonable help in the investigation.

(3) A requirement may only be made of a person who the authorised person reasonably believes is competent to give the help.

(4) The authorised person may require a person who the authorised person reasonably suspects was at or near the scene of the incident when it happened to-

• a) Answer questions relevant to the incident; or
• b) Produce documents or other things relevant to the incident.

(5) The authorised person may require an employee or a railway manager or operator to take an alcohol breath test, drug test or medical examination if the person reasonably suspects-

• a) The employee caused, or was directly involved in, the incident; and
• b) The result of the test or examination may help in deciding the circumstances and probable causes of the incident.

(6) The test or examination must take place within 2 hours after the incident happens.

(7) The cost of the test or examination must be paid by the employee's employer.

(8) A person must comply with a requirement under this section, unless the person has a reasonable excuse.
Maximum penalty - 10 penalty units.

(9) When making a requirement of a person under this section, an authorised person must warn the person, it is an offence to fail to comply with the requirement unless the person has a reasonable excuse.

(10) If the person refuses to take a test or examination, the person may be taken, for a purpose prescribed under a regulation, to have been under the influence of alcohol or a drug when the incident happened, in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

Also under the Traffic Act, a police officer can breath test a train driver after any incident or on a random basis, exactly as they can if you were driving your car. Train drivers have been breath tested by police after incidents such as derailments, level crossing collisions and people using trains to commit suicide etc..

The outgoing chairman of Queensland Rail, Mr Neville Blunt has written to the Minister for Transport and Main Roads, Mr Steve Bredhauer seeking legislation to be introduced empowering Queensland Rail to conduct alcohol and drug testing of employees as part of it's Safety Management System.

Subsequently, the Minister has corresponded to the Queensland Council of Unions seeking a response from Rail Unions.

If legislation was to be introduced, the issue would mainly be taken out of both Queensland Rail's and the AFULE's hands. Although there would be opportunity for the Union to have input on the draft legislation, the final legislation would be a product of George Street.

There are basically two directions that the AFULE can take on this issue: -

• one is to bury our heads in the sand and hope the matter goes away or wait until legislation is handed down from the Government.
• The other is for the AFULE to be pro-active and negotiate an "in house" policy that provides a safe working environment as well as setting out guidelines for members' protection.

After a lengthy wait Queensland Rail has commenced discussion with the Union in regard to the ongoing development of the Train Crew Agreement. As members are aware the current Agreement expires on 31 December 1999.

QR has provided the Union with the "wish list" and the parties are now putting in place the timetable and agenda for the negotiations.

QR has now indicated to the Union the 'significant issues' for negotiations in the Train Crew Agreement 2000. These issues are supposedly critical to QR's survival in this ever-changing climate of national competition and third party access to the QR rail network.

In 1996 an Agreement for Train Crew was struck, with the Chief Executive Officer, Vince O'Rourke, calling it a `breakthrough agreement'. This comment was supported by this Union. Contained within this Agreement were in excess of 40 workplace changes plus the business specific changes, which were to put Queensland Rail into a competitive position for the future.

A large number of these changes were implemented in the first twelve (12) months of the commencement of the Agreement and were done so without industrial disputation.

On 3 September 1999, QR tabled the previously mentioned `critical issues'. While the Union was not surprised at the proposals, there was a measure of disappointment after the discussions with management at this early stage. This was due to the Queensland Rail decision to move away from the 1996 Agreement and process adopted during those negotiations.

Here was a proven product, which had delivered positive outcomes for both QR and train crew. This was one of the few occasions where it has been a genuine "win - win" situation for the parties involved in the Agreement. It amazes me that Queensland Rail would now discard and ignore one of the few success stories achieved in the last 10 years.

Having stated these views, many would ask why the Union is not confident of another Agreement, which will deliver for management and also train crew. There are a number of reasons behind this thinking, but it is the fact that Queensland Rail has not recognised the ongoing ability for further development of the existing Agreement that disappoints the Union the most.

It is very easy for shortsighted plans to undermine the long-term goals of workplace reform. The short-term planner targets the easy or obvious (to them anyway) method for productivity enhancement. This is usually in one way - cutting operational costs. I do not need to highlight to the members that as far as many managers are concerned the easiest way to reduce these costs is to reduce staff and pursue longer working hours for the employee's that are left.

There has been a worldwide trend in successful industries that reflect the following principles being adopted:

• the flatter the management structure the more efficient the operation
• workplace change must be managed and controlled by the people that subject to the change
• recognition that the employee is an asset and not a cost
• partnership in managing change rather than the "big stick" approach

In a recent survey of major industry, 90% of the companies, which have adopted the above principles, said:

• this approach has led to increased profits for the respective organizations
• has enhanced the performance of the workforce
• has reduced the levels of workplace injuries and illness
• has achieved higher levels of employee satisfaction and job security

The AFULE had hoped that this next TCA would start to deliver some of the long-term goals of the original agreement.

• better rostering for train crew
• stability in workings
• less time away from home
• ownership of reforms in the train crew area
• career path for train crew
• 'competitiveness' of Queensland Rail
• reduced management structure in train crew operations
• reasonable wage outcomes

The AFULE will continue to pursue the issues outlined and will also be seeking to develop the, 96 TCA during the up-coming negotiation process.

Members input and comment will be sought over the next few weeks. Do not hesitate to contact your Branch Officers and/or Councillor. The rank and file will dictate the direction that is taken by the Union.

At the end of the process, industrial legislation requires a valid majority of the workers to vote on the proposed Agreement. If, in the future, members are not happy with the negotiated outcome, we will have the ability to accept or reject the TCA 2000.

The event, reaching 210 kph, from a standing start over an eight-kilometre section of track on the Tilt Train, breaking a record previously held by the XPT at 193 kph.

The main focus of the test was to demonstrate the capabilities and safety of the train, and to collect data to assist in the understanding of train operations at speeds in excess of 160 kph.

Tests where carried out over a section of straight track between Meadowvale and Avondale, just north of Bundaberg. High speed runs where conducted in the northerly direction, with a braking point marker, and station protection magnet placed at the 368-kilometre peg. A point, which allowed sufficient braking distance to the 150 kph curve using a deceleration rate less than full service.

This is not to say the train took off from zero to 210 in one go. Oh no, commencing at road speed (160) the test required several runs, each increasing by 10 kph every time. During each run, the train reached and maintained the required speed until reaching the braking point.

After stopping, the train was then driven back to Meadowvale at a speed not to exceed 60 kph. This was to allow for the cooling of traction motors and brakes to take place.

After arrival at Meadowvale, and prior to the next run, the train was subjected to an inspection by an army of technicians and engineers, checking everything, from the temperature of traction motors and circuit boards, to the rattling toilet door, nothing was overlooked.

After completing the 200 kph run, and breaking the record, everyone was confident that the train would reach the 210 mark during the next run.

We were not disappointed, especially the Police radar team situated at the braking point recording the speed with their equipment. As one Officer said, "I don't believe, that something so big, could go so ____ fast'', "you could not even hear the bloody thing coming".

Overall, the day was a big success; the train performed to expectations and provided a wealth of information for future development of high-speed trains in Australia.

Speeds where achieved effortlessly, not compromising ride, comfort or safety. At no point through out the day did the crew have any doubts about the capabilities of the train to travel at such speeds safely.

One wonders what the future may hold for rail transport in Australia.

Network Rail editor Alan Marshall secured answers from Queensland Minister for Transport, Labor Party MP Steve Bredhauer on rail reform the Queensland way.

Marshall: What do you see as being the main challenges facing the Australian Rail Industry?
Bredhauer: The main challenge for the Rail Industry is to provide sustainable employment and make a significant contribution to Australia's economic growth. To achieve this goal rail must enhance it's market position by excelling in those areas such as bulk haulage and long distance freight, where it is likely to have a natural competitive advantage. Clearly there is a need to focus on current and potential future customers and to invest wisely, especially in that track infrastructure which enables improved services for customers.

Marshall: What strategies is Queensland putting in place to address such issues?
Bredhauer: Key strategies being put in place to deal with these challenges are:

• A $52.3 billion infrastructure investment program over the next 3 years;
• Improvements in passenger services through the introduction of the Tilt Train to Rockhampton, the recent launch of the Great South Pacific Express and the planned introduction of the new diesel Tilt Train to Cairns;
• Continued improvements in Queensland Rail's efficiency to posed by National Competition policy reforms; and
• Facilitation of private sector proposals, such as the Surat Dawson Basin rail lines as well as the Brisbane Airport Rail Link.

Marshall: What are your key objectives over the next 6 to 12 months?
Bredhauer: Through implementation of the Beattie Government's priorities. I am to ensure that the Rail Industry delivers value for money, provides a strong base for employment and meets the needs of Queensland. While in the past decade, rail capital investment has exceeded the combined total rail investment of all other states, deficiencies remain. In particular, on the national standard gauge rail network, Queensland should be recognised as the important beginning rather than the forgotten end. Existing deficiencies on this line, including inadequate passing loops, must be addressed in partnership with the Commonwealth Government and the private sector.

Marshall: Queensland decided not to go down the privatisation path embraced by most other States. What are the reasons behind this approach?
Bredhauer: The Beattie Government has a strong and clear commitment to public ownership of Queensland Rail. Efficiency and reform are being delivered with public ownership.

Marshall: Are there any plans for Queensland Rail to openly compete for haulage contracts outside the State?
Bredhauer: This is a question for Queensland Rail Management. However, I note it is a potential positive flow from National Competition Policy and I am keen to pursue any proposal that results in net benefits for Queensland. Your readers would also be aware that I fully support the work of the Australian Transport Council in facilitating such competition through the harmonisation of safety and operational standards on the interstate standard gauge network.

Marshall: Queensland is currently leading in promoting quality passenger rail travel targeted at the tourist market. Are there more plans to introduce new rail travel services down the track?
Bredhauer: Queensland Rail has been particularly entrepreneurial in the development of the Great South Pacific Express. This beautiful train specifically targets the higher end of the market and we are very confident it will be successful. However, Government commitment to regional areas has not been forgotten in Queensland. High speed Tilt Trains, introduced last November between Brisbane and Rockhampton, have significantly boosted patronage. Tilt Train technology will extend to Cairns in 2001.

This land of sheep is becoming the land of trees - or so it seems from Tranz Rail traffic statistics. Over the last couple of years forest products, from raw logs to fine paper, have become the largest single commodity group moving by rail in New Zealand.

Of a total 11.7 million tonnes moved by rail in the year to June 1998, the largest single category was forest based products of 4.1 million tonnes, displacing agricultural and food products for the second year in succession.

Farm-based traffic rose too, but not at the same rate as forestry, which jumped a dramatic 161 percent in the 6 months to 31 December, compared with the corresponding period the previous year.

The Asian crisis knocked New Zealand's forest exports badly, but recent months have seen a recovery of demand from overseas markets and export tonnages are again climbing, although prices still lag.

Just 2 years ago, only 40 percent of the export logs arriving at the main forestry export port of Tauranga for shipment came by rail - today that figure is 70 percent.

Tranz Rail has increased it's market share partly by getting costs down, tackling such issues as improved wagon utilisation, but it has also worked hard at devising package deals for it's forestry customers. A good example is the work done for the Marusumi wood chip mill near Whangarei, north of Auckland.

Tranz Rail handles virtually all the mill's transport requirements. It arranges the delivery of logs to several railheads, moves the logs by rail to the chip mill and then carries the chips to the port of Whangarei for export and that last-named haul is one of barely 12 kilometres.

Whangarei Local Government gave planning permission to the mill on the understanding that the export chips would be railed to the port and not trucked through busy city streets. Tranz Rail met this challenge by coming up with an innovative system of side-tipping containers on wagons which does the job efficiently.

Another packaged deal looks after the transport requirements of the giant Fletcher Newsprint Mill at Kawerau. Tranz Rail carries away newsprint to Tauranga for export and distributes it to newspapers in New Zealand, offering in this case a door to door service using rail plus, one of New Zealand's biggest owner driver truck fleets.

In a nutshell, the company has been winning in the forestry sector by reducing costs to a minimum, improving service quality and most of all by offering total transport solutions, using not only it's rail network and inter island ferries, but also it's linking road transport operation.

London commuters have grown weary of the station recording announcements and the voices of on-board train announcers, bearing bad news about delays. In a bid to lighten the load of the travelling public, the London Underground has digitally recreated the voice of the long dead sex-siren Marilyn Monroe to convey their future train announcements.

In selecting her voice, a London Underground spokesperson said, "that, in testing voices on customers, they found Marilyn's as sounding 'genuinely helpful'." If the London Underground were really smart, they should have selected the voice of Elvis and when things really go wrong, staff could abdicate any responsibility by simply pushing the button that announces - "Elvis has left the station".

It seems that the Australian Government is not the only one concerned about fatigue in transport. The US National Transport Safety Board (NTSB) is also worried that tired train drivers, airline pilots, ship captains and truck drivers are putting the travelling public at risk.

The NTSB has just voted to recommend that the various Government Administration responsible for air, road, rail and sea transportation establish, within 2 years, new scientifically based hours of service regulations.

Existing regulations between the various forms of transport vary widely. Airline pilots can work a maximum of only 100 hours per month, truck drivers 250 hours, ship operators 360 hours, but it seems the poor old train drivers can be allowed on duty up to 432 hours per month before he is considered a safety risk.

Aussie train drivers have never had it so good, but watch out, privatisation is on it's way!

A major rail industry demarcation dispute is looming after a group of Hunter Valley train drivers dumped the Rail, Tram and Bus Union (RTBU) to join the Australian Services Union (ASU). The breakaway FreightCorp drivers have formed the NSW Train Drivers Association and joined the ASU. The RTBU (formerly the Public Transport Union) says just 20 of 400 Hunter Valley drivers are involved. The ASU says 60 Hunter Valley drivers have switched unions.

The RTBU has accused the ASU of 'courting' it's members, a charge disputed by ASU Assistant Secretary George Panigiris. "All of these divers have come to us and they are obviously unhappy with the service coming from the RTBU," Mr Panigiris said.

RTBU State Secretary Mr Nick Lewocki said the ASU had no 'constitutional or rule rights' to cover train drivers, but Mr Panigiris disagreed. He said that FreightCorp drivers were employed under Federal Awards and that the Workplace Relations Act allowed freedom of presentation.

Mr Panigiris said the breakaway drivers had begun moves to have their own enterprise bargain negotiated with FreightCorp.

Asked if FreightCorp was 'backing' the RTBU over the ASU, a spokeswoman said FreightCorp acknowledged the freedoms of association in the Workplace Relations Act.

-Extract from The Newcastle Herald 14 August 1999

Melbourne: Toll Holdings has come another step closer to running it's own freight trains along the East Coast, complementing its thrice-weekly East West service. The company has recently been given access by the relevant state authorities to run small length trains along the Melbourne-Brisbane corridor, although it will ultimately seek to run longer trains in this corridor. Scheduled services for the East Coast trains may begin in a matter of months following positive half-year financial results to 31 December 1998, primarily as a consequence of larger payloads and increased lengths on it's East-West service. Toll said it would continue to pursue strategic growth in ports, rail systems and specialised warehousing facilities.

Sydney - Brisbane

The Australian Federated Union of Locomotive Employees (AFULE) is the oldest Railway Union in the world and has been specialising in representing Train Crews for over 100 years. Being a Union that specialises in Train Crew issues, we are able to offer professional services tailored to suit the needs of new and existing Train Crew members, both male and female.

• Can make your job as rewarding, safe and pleasant as possible.
• Can provide representation and legal advice if things go wrong.
• Can take your Worker's Compensation case if you have an accident at work or suffer any injury.
• Can be a source of great help and comfort to your or your family in times of need.

The AFULE has successfully represented compensation claims for Train Crews such as Stress, Skin Cancers, Heart Attacks and Bodily Injuries. In addition, the AFULE also offers a Mortality Benefit of $3,500.00 to the next-of-kin if a member dies whilst financial with this Union.

The AFULE has elected Representatives in every Train Crew Depot throughout Queensland. These Officers are drawn from Train Crew ranks and are only too willing to assist and offer advice to members on a range of issues from Award Entitlements to the day-to-day duties of Train Crew. Hence, the motto of the AFULE.

If you believe that your future is a part of Queensland Rail's Train Crew, then the AFULE is the Union for you.

4000 Class Locomotive
The first 4000 Class Locomotive is expected to arrive at the Callemondah Commissioning Shed for trials in the first week of November 1999. The simulator is to be in place to up-skill train crew before the arrival of the first 4000-class locomotive.

2600 Class Locomotives
A draft scope of works has been put together by Rolling stock. This will be fine-tuned over the next several weeks in consultation with Depot and State Cab Representatives.

2800 Class Locomotives
A working party has been established in Townsville, involving local delegates similar to that in Jilalan/Callemondah. This working party will facilitate a process to resolve all outstanding issues, which affect the 2800 class.

3100-3300-3500 Class Locomotives
Working parties have been set up at Jilalan and Callemondah to facilitate Locomotive modifications.

• Wipers- electric - pneumatic
• Air conditioner upgrade
• Tool boxes
• Door catches
• UHF radios.

3900 Class Locomotive
Rolling stock have given an undertaking to modify this class of Locomotive to that of the 3500 class. This program has commenced with the trailing of windows. The Cab Committee will put a scope of works in place.

2100-2450-2470 Class Locomotives
Cab modifications will either be done on inspections at the Redbank Workshops when undergoing the TDO/DOO modification program.

2300 Class Locomotive
Some problems have arisen since the original scope of works was put in place. Rolling stock has agreed to address these areas in conjunction with the Redbank Workshops.

Radio-CD Players Locomotives
A trail of portable Radio-CD players has begun for assessment of suitability and obtaining data for risk assessment. Hopefully a safety validation submission is just around the corner.

Supplier Fails To Label Acid Properly
In July 1996, a worker sustained chemical burns to his unprotected hands from an aluminium cleaner he was using. Further investigation found that the cleaner had not been labelled correctly by the manufacturer and supplier of the substances.

Belgold (Qld) Pty Ltd manufactures and supplies industrial chemicals, some of which include substances that are designated hazardous substances. The cleaning product involved in lathe incident originated from them. It was a mixture of hydrofluoric acid and sulphuric acid to be used for the cleaning and pickling of metals.

Under health hazard information, the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for the product states that the health effects are severe to fatal if swallowed, contacted or inhaled.

In May 1996, Belgold supplied 2, 25 litre labelled containers of the substance with 4 empty, unlabelled 5 litre containers to a retail outlet. However, the labels on the containers only had 2 of the 6 necessary safety and risk phrases on them.

Under the Workplace Health & Safety Act 1995, a manufacturer or supplier of a substance for use at a workplace has an obligation to ensure that appropriate information about the safe use of the substance.

The safety and risk phrases for hydrofluoric acid and sulphuric acid are stated in the National Code of Practice for the labelling of Workplace Substance. Belgold (Qld) Pty Ltd was found guilty and fined $5,000.00.

Infringement Notice Fines Take First Steps
In it's first 3 months, 31 fines have been issued under the Division of Workplace Health & Safety's new fine system. The majority of fines have been given for failing to comply with an improvement notice.

This is the only infringement that can be given under the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995. All other fines are given for breaches of the Workplace Health & Safety Regulation 1997.

Nine different types of breaches received fines these were;

1. fail to comply with improvement notices
2. use of registrable workplace before registration
3. principal contractor's workplace plan not prepared before start of construction work
4. work plan not prepared before start of specified work
5. use of registrable plant before registration
6. fail to make a written record of date of induction and name of worker inducted
7. all persons to work in prescribed occupation without certificate or when not trainee in prescribed occupation
8. work in prescribed occupation without certificate or when not trainee in prescribed occupation
9. fail to notify of 'event' happening at a workplace

Work Plan Not Prepared
A work plan was not prepared before the start of specified work at 1 construction workplace in Mt. Isa.

In September, a Divisional Inspector saw concreters walking around on a scaffold while placing and finishing a suspended concrete slab at around 2.8 metres from the ground.

When asked, the principal contractor was unable to provide a copy of the work plan for the specified work being carried out. Improvement and prohibition notices were issued and the principal contractor was informed an infringement fine could follow.

Limitation Of Hours
The A.F.U.L.E., through a dispute notification issued in 1998, has had Queensland Rail in front of the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission four (4) times in the last seven (7) months.

The reason for this constant return to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission was due to the fact that this Union was able to substantiate to the Industrial Relations Commissioner that Queensland Rail was not fulfilling its obligations to it's employees. This obligation was in regard to the provisions for the limitation of hours for train crew.

Through ongoing discussion and compulsory conferences held between the parties under the umbrella of the Industrial Relations Commission, this Union has been able to progress and implement a process throughout the whole of Queensland Rail, which deals with the issue of crews working past the limitation of hours.

Members should be aware of the process that the Union was able to gain agreement from Queensland Rail to put in place, is not restricted to Two Driver Operation shifts.

The parties have acknowledged that whether the shift is two person crewing, driver only operations or two driver operation, employees in Queensland Rail should be entitled to the provisions of their industrial agreement.

The Industrial Relations Commissioner (Commissioner Bechley) has in his discussions with Queensland Rail and this Union, highlighted his disappointment on this occasion with QR managements poor reaction and implementation of the process that was agreed with the A.F.U.L.E. in November 1998.

Whilst this Union still has reservations about Queensland Rail's ability to maintain a process that ensures the limitation of hours provisions are adhered to, it will be a situation of 'time will tell'.

Driver Only Operation in Dark Territory
QR indicated to the A.F.U.L.E. in the early part of the 1999 that the issue of DOO on the North West Corridor would be progressed during the year. It was QR's intent to implement DOO on the Mount Isa to Townsville corridor on a number of services with a view for full implementation on all suitable services.

The A.F.U.L.E. was disappointed with the way in which the Coal & Mainline Freight Group chose to handle the implementation of DOO on this corridor. The Union was put in a position where the ability to come to a compromise on a number of critical issues was not available. This was caused by the fact that Coal & Mainline Freight Group were polarising on the issue of the shortage of crews and increasing of traffic. Queensland Rail had advised that they would commence DOO in a time frame that the Union saw as unreasonable.

Subsequently, numerous meetings were undertaken including a number of meetings with the Chief Executive Officer Mr Vince O'Rourke, where Queensland Rail continually reaffirmed their position that the commercial requirements of the organizations were essential for the rapid start up for DOO on that corridor.

At the meeting on 25 June 1999, the position from Queensland Rail was that given the critical commercial importance for DOO, QR intended to commence the running of DOO trains from 1 August 1999.

The Union was aware that the enhanced GPS system in the Locomotive Cab would provide Drivers with the ability to know the location of their train on the corridor. This would be in conjunction with train control also having the ability to track all traffic using GPS that would give location (section and kilometre peg) and speed. The A.F.U.L.E. advised that without this first fundamental safe guard in place, would cause this Union and its members a great deal of concern.

The A.F.U.L.E. position has not altered and we were insisting that the GPS systems be in place prior to the first DOO train. The Union had advised Queensland Rail that we believe their request for rapid implementation was unreasonable. This argument was supported by the fact that discussion on implementation had started in 1997 and at that stage the Union had flagged the GPS issue at that time.

Subsequently, a meeting was arranged between this Union and the Minister for Transport, where the unions' concerns were tabled along with the background of this issue. The Minister gave the Union a fair hearing and took on board our concern over this whole matter of DOO.

The CEO, Vince O'Rourke, who indicated that he wished to have further discussion on the matter of DOO, contacted the Union. The CEO advised that he recognised the concern of the employees in the North West corridor and that with assistance from his office, the technology to give drivers the enhanced GPS system in cab could be achieved by 29 November 1999.

The Chief Executive Officer agreed that this would now become the commencement date for DOO. Mr O'Rourke further advised that if this technology were not in place, DOO would not commence.

Whilst there are still a number of issues being addressed that deal with specific issues on the corridor, members should be aware that the introduction of DOO between Mount Isa and Townsville will set the standard of DOO in dark territory in Queensland Rail.

This Union has insisted that a commitment from Queensland Rail be forth coming to continue the development of GPS technology. The Union is hopeful that eventually GPS would give similar enhanced train safety as is achieved in ATC / ATP.

The developments and steps forward that Queensland Rail has made in linking GPS to the Direct Train Control (DTC) system is saleable technology. Rail systems which have similar operations in "Dark Territory" will now have access to a very marketable enhancement to any safe working system where no signalling governs operations (ie; train order, proceed order, staff and ticket etc).

In closing, the DOO issue on the North West corridor is still in the hands of the working party, with a future meeting requested by the Union to address the outstanding issues. The A.F.U.L.E. is confident that all issues will be adequately resolved prior to the first DOO train running on the corridor.

MEMBERS SHOULD ALSO READ CIRCULARS 16-99, 18-99, 37-99, 41-99 AND 42-99.

Locomotive Serviceability Standards
In 1996 the A.F.U.L.E. sought from Queensland Rail a commitment to put in place a minimum standard for all Locomotives, which enter traffic. This minimum standard would ensure that a driver starting a shift of duty could expect that the minimum requirements for crew comfort and safety would be met. The safety management standard (SMS) for the "operational integrity of trains" also supports this minimum serviceability standard. The SMS spells out the requirements for all safety equipment etc on a Locomotive and what must be in place if this equipment is not working.

Over the past two and a half years, discussions have been ongoing and with the restructure of Queensland Rail in 1997, the process was slowed somewhat. Towards the end of 1998, the Union was able to get commitment to begin a thirty (30) week trial of an agreed standard in both the Toowoomba and Mayne Diesel Shed servicing points.

At a meeting on 12 July 1999, the issue of the serviceability standard was discussed as the 30 week trial was half way through and a great deal of information had been gathered. In addition the support for the minimum standard from train crew was gathering momentum. During the discussions at this meeting, the A.F.U.L.E.'s position was that the serviceability standards should apply to all Locomotives across the State. That all Locomotive-provisioning certificates should be of the one type and replaced with a "Locomotive serviceability Certificate". An accountable reporting structure for Locomotive faults is urgently required in this process and that it did not matter whether the driver was getting on a Locomotive in the north, south east or west, this Union expected the agreed standard to be applied.

These points were conveyed to Queensland Rail and were successfully negotiated to an agreed outcome. In addition, at this meeting Queensland Rail was requested by the A.F.U.L.E. to give a commitment for a commencement date of the standard. The thirty week trial will finish on 18 October 1999, after which the parties will have seven (7) days to ensure that required procedures and processes are in place.

The A.F.U.L.E. is now able to advise that Queensland Rail be committed to a start date for the Locomotive Serviceability Standard of 25 October 1999. It is hoped that with the new standard being applied from that date, all train crew, supervisors of train crew and managers of Locomotive allocations will be aware of the minimum requirement for any Locomotive that is to enter traffic.

This is a significant gain for train crew. Those drivers, who have been in this organization for a large number of years, would recognise that this has been long overdue. As pointed out to Queensland Rail, it has been an industrial issue for this Union for over ten (10) years and that this Union has in good faith, tried to work through the process consultation for the past two and a half years.

It is refreshing to see that QR have bitten the bullet (so to speak) and agreed with the Union that it is time to stop trialing and time to take action, which demonstrates commitment to their train crew employees.

Information on this issue was contained in circulars 11-99, 15-99 and 43-99.

Train Crew Agreement Negotiations
Members are aware of correspondence recently distributed in relation to Queensland Rail's position on the Train Crew Agreement negotiations. QR have indicated to the Union that they will required a number of further internal meetings between their business groups, prior to developing a proposal which they wished to discuss with the Union.

The Train Crew Agreement was a breakthrough agreement for both this Union and Queensland Rail. The workplace changes that have been undertaken by train crew have been implemented without any disputation or industrial stoppages. QR is now in a stronger position to hold out third party operators. It is a fact that there were many people in QR management and even other unions who believed that the changes contained in the Train Crew Agreement 1996 would never see the light of day. Time has shown this to be incorrect.

It has been the commitment from the members of this Union and all train crew in general that has allowed this agreement to be the success that it is today. This Union's concern today is the undermining of the intent of the 1996 industrial agreement. The Train Crew Agreement was put in place in 1996 to facilitate progressive workplace change, not as a means for management to force implementation down the employees' throats.

The reason for the success in the past and in this I have no doubt, was due to the fact that at the time we had a single operations unit dealing with the majority (80%) of train crew. Under this structure all workplace change could be undertaken in a progressive and consultative manner, with implementation controlled by the employees it affected, (i.e. train crew).

The first Train Crew Agreement two meeting was held on 27 July, where the negotiation teams, timetable and proposed issues were tabled. This meeting was to be a "without prejudice" discussion and to gauge the level of agreement or alternatively disagreement on issues. On Friday 3 September 1999, QR tabled to the Union their broad proposals for the development and negotiation of the Train Crew Agreement 2000.

The Queensland Rail proposed framework for the agreement:

• Agreement to have a 2-year life
• Remove the flow on of wage increases that train crew presently receive from the EA
• A productivity framework that is out put based
• Wage increases dependant on the achievement of performance indicators and real business out comes

The key issues from QR management are listed below:

CITYTRAIN

• Ability to employ part time train crew
• Shift length - minimum of 5 hours and a maximum of 10 hrs
• Master roster to have a minimum of 320 and a maximum of 326 hours. (Overtime would still be paid after 320 hours)

• Continued extension of DOO
• Ability to roster DOO shifts to 11 hours
• remote control locomotive operation for main line trains
• Seasonally profiled work force - utilise part time train crew in seasonal depots (eg Sugar, grain, live stock etc)
• Self drive motor vehicles to the sift limitations
• Remove the industrial requirement for ATC - ATP in Remote controlled signalled areas
• Ability to recruit locally (external to Queensland Rail) where train crew recruitment and retention is of concern.

On the 13th of September QR provided the Union with the discussion papers dealing with their proposals to date and also the business group specific changes, which they are seeking. The negotiation teams from the Union and QR will engage in the first round of meaningful discussion on the 16th and 17th of September. It is envisaged that this preliminary meeting will also clarify the relative party positions.

The A.F.U.L.E. representatives at this point in time are:

State Officer
Greg Smith.

Citytrain Representatives
Ray Stafford
Larry Hanrahan.

General Freight and Coal Representatives
Greg Hooper
Keryn Staib
Bob Stewart
Jeff Paroz.