he contacted the signalman to request that the power be turned off and jumped on to the line in protective shoes to remove it which he did safely, most certainly avoiding a collision that may have had dire consequences had the trolley been hit and thrown into waiting passengers, many like myself would have thought that his boss, South West Trains, would have congratulated him, well they went one further, the whole 9 yards, they dismissed him after a 27-year career for ‘a serious breach of safety’ yes Ian was sacked, he lost his mortgage protection and pension! Health and Safety rules strike again,
the incident which cost Mr Faletto his job was on Sunday, March 6, a week later, a district manager saw the incident while looking through CCTV footage and it emerged that the power had not been switched off, Mr Faletto was suspended and then sacked following a disciplinary hearing, Mr Faletto also ran Lymington Town, Ashurst and Beaulieu Road stations on a branch line from the main line to Lymington, a staging post for Isle of Wight ferries, the single-track line has two trains an hour in each direction, Mr Faletto, who is taking his former employers to a tribunal, worked at nearby Sway station for 15 years before moving to the Lymington line, He has won 25 awards, including most improved station in the region and best kept station in the country for four years in a row, Mr Faletto also won a rare award for ‘outstanding personal contribution’ to the railways, still he has now learnt his lesson, better to stand idly by and watch an accident happen than to prevent it!
shame on you South West Trains, a more loyal and dedicated worker you could not have asked for, to treat him this way is shabby in the extreme.
Ian's a really good guy and we miss him at Sway, but you always got the feeling that his dedication was always seen as an embarassment by the management & some other staff at SWT. Ian sets a very high standard for himself that, sadly, is all too rare these days and some people resent it rather than admire it, especially if it illustrates their inability to do a good job. I think SWT hoped Ian would fail at Lymington, but he didn't as he is too good for that.
ReplyDeleteThey should have praised Ian and sacked the signalman for not doing his job, but I bet he's in a more powerful union.
This is outrageous behaviour by South West Trains. Please sign up to online petition to help reinstate Ian Faletto.
ReplyDeleteOr was he sacked for staying on the track and removing tin cans and newspapers. Obviously these could derail a train. Oh no. They can't and yet he still put himself in a place of danger for no obvious reason. Perhaps. If writing blogs you should try and collate all the information and not half a story.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous, you seem to know so much more than what was stated in the original article, could you please let us know where you get your facts from? i.e. the source of your information, so I can publish a rebuttal, I also presume from your comment there was no supermarket trolley then as stated in the original article? best regards Stan and Diana.
ReplyDeletethe problem with Ian Faletto is that he " assumed " that he was dealing with a railway from nearly 20 years or so ago .
ReplyDeleteHe was a South West Trains Employee , they merely operate the service using trains leased from the Banks . The station and the land belongs to quasi private company but state underwritten Network Rail , all South West Trains own in that station are bits of Office Furniture and equipment .
The track is NOT his concern end of . The Bobby ( Signalman ) who works for Network Rail can't switch the juice off , that can only be done by Control . They'll only switch the juice off if there was a fatality etc .
You needed insulation gloves , wooden paddles , wooden bars to put over the juice rail etc even in BR days .
We used to get contradictory waffle about PTS cards , you could run the risk of a Form 1 for being on the track even if a train had hit someone and killed someone .
Network Rail have got MOM staff that come out in a van if there is due course for concern .
There is a lot of politics , some of it you would not believe , in BR days there was a top down Military chain of command , now the chain of command is long and convoluted . The fragmented and dysfunctional railway is held together by contracts instead .
All the different interests work against each other , fining and blaming each other . The culture is very paranoid . You do not get involved in that ! , and Management can be very spiteful and vindictive re all the petty politics .
Tax Payer Subsidy has gone up by six times from the 90's .
It is true that Stagecoach ( Parent Company ) of SWT would love to get rid of station staff to cut costs , they are out to make a profit .....they don't give a flying one about anything else ; but the franchisee does not allow it . However the smart game is to give the barstewards nothing .
What does smell about this is that the District Mgr apparently had to examine a CCTV tape where a passenger went under a stationary train to retrieve something .
It is true that some managers wouldn't dare say as much as boo to a goose and would cowardly throw their own staff to the wolves to save their sorry asses , he might well be a jumped up expletive deleted hawk ! promoted under the Peter Principle beyond his ability . .
However with all the politics , I'd be very careful if there was a CCTV camera .
However as regards to a Industrial Tribunal if he passes a Pre Hearing , I feel Ian would only have a case if SWT Management have been less than truthful re the justification for his dismissal . Or ! if adverse inferences can be drawn with all the cost saving politics with or without a small " p " .
If SWT have followed their own due procedure and not botched anything by dotting the i's and crossing the t's , giving Ian enough rope to hang himself with warnings , SWT would be seen as acting reasonably .
Secondly SWT could argue that with the unprecedented adverse publicity that the District Manager has been harassed and they'd have a duty of care to protect him . Most organisations biggest nightmare is a disgruntled manager breaking ranks and blowing the whistle damaging corporate image .
As for the Union Bashing comments from another century in the media , I very much doubt that Ian is a RMT member , if you do things well out of your remit and come in on your days off for nothing and not take Annual Leave ; it gives the reps problems when representing / protecting their members . His loyalty to SWT was very misplaced or naive at best .
Given the poor standard of some ! Railway Management , even some ardent right wingers concede unions are a necessary evil and you could argue some of these Train Operating Companies get precisely the union they deserve due to their confrontational style .
Please don't shoot the messenger !! Thanks
Dear Anonymous, many thanks for your insight into what appears to be a far more complicated case than was reported, but my point still is that whilst he may have committed a breach of Health and Safety, to have stood idly by knowing that a train will hit the trolley mentioned in the article would place most if not all of us in a moral dilemma, wait and see who gets injured or remove the obstruction? in any event I still feel that to strip him of his job, low cost mortgage and pension is harsh for some one who appears to put the publics safety before his own, best regards, Stan and Diana.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous and Linda, sorry to have taken so long to reply, I agree it is outrageous to treat him this way, we have been out of the country for a week or two so we have not kept up to date on any follow up to it, if you have any new information could you please send the link in a comment and I will update it for those wishing to follow it, best regards, Stan and Diana.
ReplyDeleteSadly, all the dedication in the world wont mean a thing if you break health and safety regs on the railway. I would love to know the facts. I am railway booking office worker too. I would hate to think that he had been foolish.
ReplyDelete