Annual Safety
Performance Report
2013/14
Key facts and figures
Contents
Introduction.....................................................................................................2
2013/14 Headline statistics............................................................................3
Background.....................................................................................................4
Risk profile for the railway – fatalities...................................................................................4
Risk profile for the railway – all injuries...............................................................................5
Recent safety trends.......................................................................................................................6
Long-term safety trends................................................................................................................7
Rail safety in context: inter-modal comparisons............................................................8
Rail safety in context: European comparisons................................................................9
Risk from train accidents............................................................................10
Long-term trends...........................................................................................................................10
Potentially higher-risk train accidents................................................................................ 11
Train accident precursors.........................................................................................................12
Signals passed at danger (SPADs)....................................................................................13
Risk to passengers......................................................................................14
Passenger fatalities......................................................................................................................14
Major injuries to passengers...................................................................................................15
Passenger harm at the platform-train interface...........................................................16
Passenger and public assaults.............................................................................................17
Risk to the workforce...................................................................................18
Workforce fatalities.......................................................................................................................18
Workforce major injuries............................................................................................................19
Workforce assaults.......................................................................................................................20
Rail safety in context: occupational risk...........................................................................21
Risk to members of the public.................................................................... 22
Public fatalities................................................................................................................................22
Trespass fatalities by cause....................................................................................................23
Motivation for trespass...............................................................................................................24
Risk at the road-rail interface...................................................................... 25
Fatalities at level crossings......................................................................................................25
The Strategic Safety Plan............................................................................26
Trajectories of the 2009 - 2014 SSP..................................................................................26
Progress against other industry requirements......................................... 27
High Level Output Specification...........................................................................................27
Learning from Operational Experience...................................................... 28
Key safety facts............................................................................................31
Definitions and scope..................................................................................38
Fatalities and weighted injuries..................................................................39
Further information......................................................................................40
1
Introduction
RSSB was established in April 2003 to support the railway industry
in its management of cross-industry issues, including safety.
Through its services, RSSB assists the industry in the challenge of
maintaining and, where reasonably practicable, reducing the risk
to passengers, railway employees, and members of the public. The
analysis and presentation of safety performance information is a
key part of this function.
The 2013/14 Annual Safety Performance Report (ASPR) reviews the
performance levels achieved during the year across a number of topic areas.
RSSB reports on a financial year basis for consistency with Control Period
4 (CP4), its associated High Level Output Specification (HLOS), and the
Railway Strategic Safety Plan (SSP), all of which covered the period April
2009 to March 2014.
The ASPR’s main purpose is to inform those in the industry who manage
risk. However, it is also intended to inform other rail industry employees,
passengers, the Government (and its agencies), and the public at large.
Here, we present a ‘pocket-sized’ version of some key points from the main
report. The full report may be downloaded from our website at
www.rssb.co.uk.
2
2013/14 Headline statistics
• 1.59 billion passenger journeys, a 6% increase on 2012/13
• 0passenger or workforce fatalities in train accidents for the seventh consecutive year
• 4 passenger fatalities in individual incidents, all at the platform-
train interface
• 3 workforce fatalities:
–
Two infrastructure workers died in a road traffic accident
while on duty
–
An infrastructure worker working on the track was struck by a
train
• 308 public fatalities:
–279 were suicides or suspected suicides
–21 were trespassers
–8 occurred at level crossings
• 270 major injuries to passengers
• 126 major injuries to members of the workforce
3
Background
Risk profile for the railway – fatalities
The industry uses the Safety Risk Model (SRM) to assess the underlying
level of risk to passengers, staff and the public from the operation and
maintenance of the mainline railway. The current version of the SRM is
version 8.0, which was published in March 2014.
Fatality risk profile excluding suicide (66.2 fatalities/year)
FWI /
year
8.3
3.8
54.1
Train accidents, 13%
Train accidents, 23%
Other accidents, 13%
Other accidents, 4%
Struck on station LX, 6%
Assault and abuse, 7%
Slips, trips, and falls, 11%
Train accidents, 7%
Other accidents, 3%
Pedestrians at LX, 12%
Fall from height, 5%
Electric shock, 7%
Road-traffic accidents, 21%
Trespass, 79%
Platform-train interface, 48%
Struck / crushed
by train, 41%
Passenger
Workforce
Source: SRMv8
Public
•
Most of the fatality risk is to members of the public, with trespass
accounting for 79% of their risk. Accidents to pedestrians at level
crossings are the next largest source, accounting for 12% of fatality risk
to members of the public.
•
Passenger fatality risk arises from a number of sources; more than
half is from individual accidents at stations, especially at the platformtrain interface (PTI), which accounts for 48% of their fatality risk. Train
accidents account for just over one-fifth of passenger fatality risk.
•
The largest proportion of workforce fatality risk arises from being struck
or crushed by trains. This risk mainly affects infrastructure workers.
4
Background
Risk profile for the railway – all injuries
The railway measures overall harm in terms of fatalities and weighted injuries
(FWI) – defined on page 39.
FWI risk profile excluding suicide (143.4 FWI/year)
FWI /
year
58.4
Train accidents, 5%
On-board injuries, 7%
Other accidents, 5%
Assault and abuse,
16%
Platform-train
interface, 21%
26.0
59.0
Train accidents, 4%
Train accidents, 7%
Other accidents, 20%
Other accidents, 6%
Pedestrian accidents
at LX, 11%
Manual handling, 5%
Platform-train interface, 7%
Assault and abuse, 7%
Struck / crushed by train, 7%
On-board injuries, 11%
Trespass, 76%
Contact with object, 15%
Slips, trips, and falls, 47%
Slips, trips, and falls, 26%
Passenger
Workforce
Public
Source: SRMv8
•
When fatal and non-fatal injuries are considered, the large number of
lower consequence accidents such as slips, trips and falls results in the
risk profile being split more evenly between passengers, the workforce
and members of the public.
•
Relatively few non-fatal public injuries are recorded. This is partly
because the hazards that account for most of the risk (in particular, being
struck by trains) are more likely to result in fatalities than injuries.
•
The grouping other accidents to the workforce includes machinery
operation, platform-train interface issues, and shock or trauma from
witnessing suicides.
5
Background
Recent safety trends
Over the past 10 years, and against a background of generally increasing rail
usage, industry initiatives have brought about improvements in the safety of
passengers and workforce.
Normalised passenger and workforce harm
6
2.5
0.0
2013/14
0
2012/13
0.5
2011/12
1
2010/11
1.0
2009/10
2
2008/09
1.5
2007/08
3
2006/07
2.0
2005/06
4
2004/05
FWI per 100m journeys
5
3.0
FWI per 10m workforce hours
Passenger FWI rate
Workforce FWI rate
Source: SMIS
•
The level of passenger harm in 2013/14 was 43.1 FWI, compared with
47.4 FWI in 2012/13. When normalised by passenger journeys, the rate
of harm decreased by 14%.
•
The level of workforce harm in 2013/14 was 25.2 FWI, compared with
22.8 FWI in 2012/13. When normalised by workforce hours, the rate of
harm increased by 8%.
•
Overall, the rates of passenger and workforce harm have shown a
generally decreasing trend over the past ten years.
6
Background
Long-term safety trends
Railway safety has improved significantly over the last 50 years.
Trends in fatalities over the past 50 years
400
Passenger
Workforce
Public (mainline railway)
Public (all railways)
350
300
Fatalities
250
200
150
100
0
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991/92
1993/94
1995/96
1997/98
1999/00
2001/02
2003/04
2005/06
2007/08
2009/10
2011/12
2013/14
50
Source: ORR data for mainline railway up to 1993/94, RSSB data from 1994/95 onwards.
Public (all railways) – ORR data, includes London Underground and other rail systems.
•
The greatest reduction over the past 50 years has been in workforce
fatalities. The annual number of workforce fatalities exceeded 100 in the
mid-1960s and is now consistently lower than five.
•
There has also been a long-term downward trend in the number of
passenger fatalities. The ‘spikes’ in numbers shown on the chart reflect
the occurrence of major train accidents.
•
There has been no comparable sustained reduction in public fatalities
(which mainly comprise trespassers and suicides).
7
Background
Rail safety in context: inter-modal comparisons
Rail remains one of the safest modes of transport
There have been substantial improvements in the safety of both road and
rail transport over the past five decades. However, car travel is only now
achieving levels of safety that the railway was achieving 30 years ago, on a
per traveller kilometre basis.
Traveller fatality risk for different transport modes (relative to rail)
1400
1218
Fatality risk per traveller km
as a multiple of rail
1200
1000
800
600
426
400
430
200
0
1
5
23
Mainline
railway
Bus or
coach
Car
Pedal cycle Pedestrian Motorcycle
Source: SRMv8 for rail, Department for Transport (DfT) for other modes.
•
On the basis of fatality risk per traveller km, rail travel is:
– Around 1,200 times safer than travelling by motorcycle.
– Roughly 400 times safer than cycling or walking.
– Around 20 times safer than using a car.
– Around five times safer than bus and coach travel.
•
Public transport is generally safer than private transport.
•
Although not shown on the chart, most existing estimates put air safety
on a similar level to rail safety on a per traveller km basis.
8
Background
Rail safety in context: European comparisons
UK railways compare favourably with other EU countries
The Railway Safety Directive states the requirement for Member States to
ensure that safety is generally maintained and, where reasonable practicable,
continuously improved.
Passenger and workforce fatality rates on the largest EU railways
80
67.5
Normalised workforce fatalities
Normalised passenger fatalities
EU-25 average (23.0)
48.3
60
4.1
Netherlands
France
Spain
Poland
0
1.1
10.2
Austria
10
United
Kingdom
11.8
20
Germany
17.2
27.2
Italy
30
27.5
40
Hungary
36.7
50
Czech
Republic
Fatalities per billion train km
70
Source: Eurostat data 2008-2012. The chart shows the ten largest EU railways in terms of train km.
•
Passenger and workforce fatality rates in the UK were well below the
EU-25 average over the five-year period 2008-2012.
•
In general, countries in northern and western parts of Europe have safer
railways than those further south and east.
•
The UK ranks highly among the EU-25 countries across all National
Reference Values set by the European Railway Agency.
9
Risk from train accidents
Long-term trends
No passengers or staff killed in train accidents in the
past seven years
The frequency of train accidents with passenger or workforce fatalities has
dropped steadily over the past 50 years and is now at its lowest ever level.
Train accidents currently account for around 5% of the overall FWI risk.
Train accidents with passenger and workforce fatalities
9
6 - Trains & rolling stock
5 - SPAD
4 - Objects on the line
3 - Public behaviour at level crossings
2 - Irregular working
1 - Infrastructure failures
Ten-year moving average
8
Fatal train accidents
7
6
5
4
3
2
0
1965/66
1967/68
1969/70
1971/72
1973/74
1975/76
1977/78
1979/80
1981/82
1983/84
1985/86
1987/88
1989/90
1991/92
1993/94
1995/96
1997/98
1999/00
2001/02
2003/04
2005/06
2007/08
2009/10
2011/12
2013/14
1
Source: ORR for historical data; SMIS for recent statistics.
•
The past seven years saw no train accidents with on-board fatalities.
•
There has been a substantial reduction in the frequency of fatal train
accidents caused by factors that are largely within the industry’s control,
particularly irregular working, SPADs, and train and rolling stock failures.
•
The rate of train accidents with on-board fatalities is currently around one
every five years based on a 10-year moving average.
10
Risk from train accidents
Potentially higher-risk train accidents
PHRTA numbers remain at a below average level
The types of train accident most likely to result in harm, such as collisions and
derailments, are known as potentially higher-risk train accidents (PHRTAs).
Potentially higher-risk train accidents
140
Trains struck by large falling objects
Buffer stop collisions
Collisions with road vehicles not at level crossings (without derailment)
Collisions with road vehicles at level crossings (without derailment)
Collisions with road vehicles at level crossings (with derailment)
Derailments (excluding collisions with road vehicles on level crossings)
Collisions between trains (excluding roll backs)
120
80
45
42
49
42
35
32
18
2009/10
2008/09
2007/08
2006/07
2005/06
2004/05
20
0
33
2013/14
46
40
2012/13
63
2011/12
60
2010/11
Accidents
100
Source: SMIS
•
The number of PHRTAs in 2013/14 was three fewer than the previous
year, representing the second lowest total on record.
•
Eleven of the PHRTAs in 2013/14 involved collisions with road vehicles,
ten of which occurred on level crossings. Collisions with road vehicles at
level crossings have accounted for 29% of PHRTAs since 2004/05.
•
There were no passenger train derailments in 2013/14. This is the first
such year on record. Derailments (excluding collisions with road vehicles
on level crossings) have accounted for 44% of PHRTAs over the last ten
years.
11
Risk from train accidents
Train accident precursors
PIM trend remains stable
Serious train accidents are rare, and the industry monitors trends in the risk
from PHRTAs using the Precursor Indicator Model (PIM).
Trends in train accident risk
Infrastructure
SPAD
Operational incidents
Trains and rolling stock
Public Behaviour
Public
Environmental
Workforce
16
Historical PIM trend
Previous version of
modelling and grouping
14
FWI per year
12
10
Current PIM trend
New version of
modelling and grouping
8
6
4
Mar 14
Mar 13
Sep 13
Mar 12
Sep 12
Mar 11
Sep 11
Mar 10
Sep 10
Mar 09
Sep 09
Mar 08
Sep 08
Mar 07
Sep 07
Mar 06
Sep 06
Mar 05
Sep 05
Mar 04
0
Sep 04
2
Source: SMIS and the Precursor Indicator Model
•
In 2013/14, the output from the PIM was changed to be an estimate
of the underlying level of the risk from PHRTAs, given in FWI per
year. In addition, new data sources have allowed improved modelling
back to April 2010. For this reason, the PIM ten-year trend contains a
discontinuity at April 2010 and, although the trend in the total value is
unaffected, the trends in the PIM subgroups cannot be compared across
the discontinuity.
•
The greatest share of the risk to passengers is from the infrastructure
grouping, followed by operational incidents and SPADs.
•
The passenger proportion of the PIM remained essentially level; at
March 2014, it stood at 3.32 FWI, compared with 3.28 FWI at the end of
the previous year.
12
Risk from train accidents
Signals passed at danger (SPADs)
SPAD risk at 73% of September 2006 baseline
The accident at Ladbroke Grove (1999) was caused by a SPAD, and resulted
in the death of 31 people. Since then, the industry has focused on reducing
the risk from SPADs through a range of initiatives, including the Train
Protection and Warning System (TPWS).
Trend in SPAD risk
200%
400
360
160%
293
September 2006
baseline = 100%
140%
120%
320
280
SPADs
Risk (percentage of risk
at September 2006)
180%
240
100%
200
80%
73% 160
60%
120
40%
Oct 13
Mar 14
May 13
Jul 12
Dec 12
40
Feb 12
Apr 11
Sep 11
Jun 10
Nov 10
Jan 10
Aug 09
Oct 08
Mar 09
May 08
Jul 07
Dec 07
Feb 07
Sep 06
20%
0%
80
Underlying risk (annual moving average)
Number of SPADs (annual moving total)
0
Source: SMIS and the rail industry’s SPAD risk ranking tool
•
•
There were 293 SPADs in 2013/14 compared with 250 in 2012/13.
•
RSSB and the wider industry are continuing to focus on SPAD risk to
understand both the underlying causes behind it, and how to model it
more effectively.
The estimated level of SPAD risk increased during the year.
Nevertheless, at the end of March 2014 it was still 27% lower than the
September 2006 baseline level.
13
Risk to passengers
Passenger fatalities
Four passengers were fatally injured in 2013/14
The main source of passenger fatality risk is accidents at the platform-train
interface.
Passenger fatalities by accident type
7
Fatalities
6
5
5
Other passenger injury
Assault and abuse
Slips, trips, and falls
Platform-train interface
Struck by train on station crossing
Train accidents
8
8
7
7
7
5
5
5
4
4
4
2013/14
8
2012/13
9
3
2
Train accidents
2011/12
2010/11
2009/10
2008/09
2007/08
2006/07
2005/06
2004/05
2013/14
2012/13
2011/12
2010/11
2009/10
2008/09
2007/08
2005/06
2004/05
0
2006/07
1
1
Other causes
Source: SMIS
•
There were four passenger fatalities in 2013/14. This equates to a rate of
around one fatality per 400 million passenger journeys.
•
The fatalities all occurred in separate incidents at the platform-traininterface (PTI). Intoxication was recorded as a potential contributory
factor in three of the incidents.
•
The PTI has seen the largest proportion of passenger fatalities over the
past decade, accounting for nearly 50% since 2004/05.
14
Risk to passengers
Major injuries to passengers
Major injury rate falls below the ten-year average
Most passenger major injuries are the result of slips, trips and falls in stations.
Passenger major injuries by accident type
500
400
Major injuries
350
45
40
35
312
300
250
50
Assault and abuse
Slips, trips, and falls
Platform-train interface
Train accidents
232
242
247
216
232
234
251
270
259
30
25
2013/14
2012/13
2011/12
2010/11
2009/10
0
2008/09
5
0
2007/08
10
50
2006/07
15
100
2005/06
20
150
2004/05
200
Major injuries per 100m journeys
Other passenger injury
Contact with object or person
On-board injuries
Struck by train on station crossing
Normalised rate
450
Source: SMIS
•
The number of passenger major injuries dropped in 2013/14 after
continuously increasing since 2007/08.
•
When normalised by passenger journeys, the major injury rate has
remained relatively static since 2007/08, with the exception of a peak in
2012/13.
•
Slips, trips and falls have accounted for 64% of passenger major injuries
since 2004/05. Injuries at the PTI have accounted for 18% over the same
period.
15
Risk to passengers
Passenger harm at the platform-train interface
The platform-train interface remains an important
source of risk
The severity of the injury incurred by a passenger accident at the platformtrain interface (PTI) generally increases if it involves a moving train. The
following analysis is based on all passenger injuries occurring at the PTI in
the last 10 years and, for those involving trains, highlights the type of train
movement involved.
Platform-train interface harm 2004/05 to 2013/14
Injuries per year:
(1,245.6)
4%
1%
Harm per year:
(9.9 FWI)
6%
16%
8%
Fatalities per year:
(3.2)
23%
13%
14%
95%
56%
Arriving trains
Departing trains
Stationary trains
No train involved
20%
44%
Through trains
Source: SMIS
•
Around 96% of PTI injuries involve passengers coming into contact with
trains in the station: in 95% of cases the train is stationary, and in around
1% the train is moving. The remaining 4% of PTI injuries occur when no
train is present.
•
On average, accidents involving moving trains represent nearly 30% of
all passenger harm at the PTI and almost 75% of fatalities.
•
Passengers struck by through trains represent most of the PTI harm from
moving trains and an even higher proportion of fatalities.
•
Passengers struck by departing trains accounted for 8% of all PTI harm
and 20% of fatalities.
•
Passengers struck by arriving trains represent 6% of all PTI harm and
13% of fatalities.
•
Intoxication was implicated in 66% of fatalities at the PTI.
16
Risk to passengers
Passenger and public assaults
British Transport Police data shows a continuing
reduction in the rate of assault
BTP data also includes assaults involving non-travelling members of the
public on railway premises.
Assaults on passengers and the public
5000
4217
Assaults
4000
4110
3613
3651
Harassment
Common assaults
Other violence
Actual bodily harm
GBH and more serious cases of violence
Assaults per million passenger journeys
3274
3410
3438
3452
3536
6
5
4
2013/14
Source: BTP
2012/13
0
2011/12
0
2010/11
1
2009/10
1000
2008/09
2
2007/08
2000
2006/07
3
2005/06
3000
Assaults per million passenger journeys
6000
•
The number of assaults recorded by BTP in 2013/14 was slightly higher
than that recorded in 2012/13. However, when normalised by passenger
journeys, the rate decreased by 3%.
•
Year-on-year, the normalised assault rate has decreased and is currently
around one in every 450,000 journeys. Possible contributing factors to
this improvement include targeted policing and detection technology.
•
The most serious crimes, such as grievous bodily harm (GBH),
occur infrequently, with a rate of 1 in every 13.3 million journeys.
17
Risk to the workforce
Workforce fatalities
Three staff members fatally injured
On 19 June 2013, two infrastructure workers were fatally injured in a road
traffic accident, whilst on duty.
On 22 January 2014, an infrastructure worker was fatally injured when struck
by a passenger train.
Workforce fatalities by type of worker
6
Other workforce
Revenue protection staff
Station staff
Other on-board train crew
Train drivers
Infrastructure workers
3
5
4
3
2
2009/10
2008/09
2007/08
2006/07
2005/06
0
2004/05
1
1
1
2013/14
2
2011/12
2
2
3
2012/13
3
2010/11
4
Fatalities
4
Source: SMIS
•
Since April 2004, 25 members of the workforce have died in accidents
while on duty; 20 were infrastructure workers.
•
Most workforce fatalities were the result of being struck by a train.
•
Of the three train driver fatalities occurring in the last 10 years, one was
the result of a train accident (at Ufton, in November 2004). The other
two fatalities occurred at the trackside: one was struck by a train while
changing ends, and one was electrocuted while investigating a problem
with his train.
18
Risk to the workforce
Workforce major injuries
Workforce major injuries remain at a below
average level
The most common causes of infrastructure worker major injuries are slips,
trips and falls and accidents associated with construction-type hazards. For
train drivers, the most common cause is boarding/alighting, for train crew it is
on-board injuries, and for station staff it is slips, trips and falls.
Workforce major injuries by type of worker
250
209
200
Major injuries
151
150
127
139
132
123
Other workforce
Revenue protection staff
Station staff
Other on-board train crew
Train drivers
Infrastructure workers
128
126
122
114
100
2013/14
2012/13
2011/12
2010/11
2009/10
2008/09
2007/08
2006/07
Source: SMIS
2005/06
0
2004/05
50
•
There were 126 workforce major injuries in 2013/14, an increase of 12
from the previous year. The level remains 8% below the average level of
harm over the period shown.
•
Infrastructure workers have experienced more than half of all major
injuries during each of the years shown.
•
Injuries in yards, depots and sidings are not included in the chart, but the
scope of SMIS reporting was extended (on a non-mandatory basis) to
cover these locations in April 2010. RSSB plans to extend its reporting
scope to include yards, depots and sidings in the near future.
19
Risk to the workforce
Workforce assaults
Harm from assaults shows a generally reducing trend
The harm is fairly evenly split between major injuries, minor injuries and
shock/trauma.
Harm from workforce assaults
5
Shock & trauma
Minor injuries
Major injuries
4.3
3.9
2.9
2.6
2.3
2.2
2
1.7
1.6
1.6
2013/14
2.9
3
2012/13
Weighted injuries
4
2011/12
2010/11
2009/10
2008/09
2007/08
2006/07
2005/06
0
2004/05
1
Source: SMIS
•
The overall harm from assaults on members of the workforce remains at
its lowest level in the past ten years.
•
Around 58% of staff assaults that lead to harm happen in stations. The
majority of these occur to station staff and revenue protection personnel.
Around 42% occur on trains, the majority occurring to customer-facing
train crew. Other locations make up less than 1% of workforce assaults.
•
Ticket disputes are identified as the primary cause in around 41% of
reported assaults on staff, with alcohol/drugs the primary factor in 17%.
20
Risk to the workforce
Rail safety in context: occupational risk
Railway workforce risk varies by occupation
Different activities expose workers to different levels of risk.
Industry risk comparison
12.3
Train drivers
7.8
Bus and coach drivers
40.9
HGV drivers
5.8
Station staff
Fatalities
Weighted major injuries
7.2
Sales and retail assistants
Weighted RIDDOR-reportable minor injuries
12.6
Elementary security operations
31.0
Infrastructure workers
45.4
Road construction operatives
24.6
Labourers
16.1
Other on-board train crew
0
20
40
60
80
100
FWI per 100,000 workers per year (RIDDOR-reportable only)
Source: RSSB for railway occupations, HSE for other industries. The data covers the year 2012/13 only.
•
Infrastructure workers appear to be exposed to a lower level of risk than
road construction operatives and a similar level to labourers; they are
exposed to the highest risk of the rail occupations shown.
•
Train drivers are subject to a somewhat higher level of risk than bus and
coach drivers, but a notably lower level than HGV drivers.
•
Other on-board train crew have a higher level of risk compared with
station staff. The risk mostly arises from high-frequency, but typically
low-consequence, accidents. Physical assault and verbal abuse have
accounted for nearly one-fifth of the harm over the last ten years.
•
Station staff have a somewhat lower level of risk to other customer-facing
jobs such as sales and retail assistants.
21
Risk to members of the public
Public fatalities
Increasing trend in public fatalities due to
trespass and suicide
Most injuries to members of the public arise from causes that are not within the
direct control of the railway.
Trends in total public fatalities from trespass and suicide
500
Confirmed trespass
Open/narrative/unreturned verdict
Confirmed suicide
Fatalities
400
300
231
269
267
259
264
289
284
278
300
232
200
100
0
Source: SMIS
•
Over the past decade, there has been an increasing trend in the number
of public fatalities due to trespass or suicide, with 2013/14 being the
highest recorded for the period.
•
Where available, coroners’ verdicts are used as the basis for categorising
relevant public fatalities as suicide or accidental trespass. Where a
coroner’s verdict is returned as open or narrative, or where it is not yet
returned, the industry applies the Ovenstone criteria (see the ASPR
for more details) to determine the most probable circumstances, ie
either trespass or suicide. The chart above shows the open/narrative/
unreturned cases as one group, before application of the Ovenstone
criteria; the proportion is greater towards the end of the decade reflecting
the fewer returned verdicts that have occurred.
22
Risk to members of the public
Trespass fatalities by cause
Trespass fatalities below average for the past ten years
The cause of most trespass fatalities is being struck by a train.
Trespass fatalities by cause
Electric shock
Fall (including from height)
60
52
Fatalities
50
40
38
44
43
46
Fall or jump from train
46
Struck by train
Improved classification of
trespass fatalities
40
32
30
25
21
20
2013/14
2012/13
2011/12
2010/11
2009/10
2008/09
2007/08
2006/07
2005/06
0
2004/05
10
Source: SMIS
•
•
•
The industry categorises public fatalities with open, narrative, or
unreturned coroners’ verdicts into those mostly likely to be accidental and
those not, using the Ovenstone criteria. From 2009/10, the classification
has been based on an improved data set; the trends in trespass (or
suicide) before and after this date are therefore not directly comparable
(see the ASPR for more details).
Since 2009/10, being struck by trains has accounted for 70% of
trespasser fatalities, and electric shock has accounted for a further
18%. The remaining proportion involve people who were train surfing
or deliberately exiting trains in running, or who were climbing on railway
property eg bridges/viaducts.
Accidents and near misses with people on the line often result in shock
or trauma for train drivers and other train crew, and such events can
have a lasting psychological effect.
23
Risk to members of the public
Motivation for trespass
People commit trespass for a variety of reasons
It is useful to understand the reasons why people trespass so that the most
appropriate risk management measures can be applied. For some, trespass
may be a convenience – taking a short cut along the tracks, or walking the
dog. For others, it may be a spur of the moment decision – for example if
something has been mistakenly dropped from the platform edge.
Trespass injuries by motivation
Other
7%
Theft/damage
7%
Retrieving
item
9%
60%
Shortcut
42%
40%
Evading
third party
17%
Reason identified
Horseplay/thrill
seeking
18%
Reason not identified
Source: SMIS
•
In more than half of incidents, the reason for the trespass is not known or
not identified.
•
In those events where the motivation for the trespass is identifiable, the
most common reason is for the purposes of taking a shortcut. Other
reasons where the trespass is incidental to the main motivation of the
person include retrieving an item, evading a third party, or committing
criminal theft/damage. For those engaged in horseplay or thrill-seeking
behaviour, the trespass itself may be part of the motivation.
24
Risk at the road-rail interface
Fatalities at level crossings
UK level crossing safety is among the best in Europe
There are over 6,000 level crossings in use on the mainline railway,
comprising many different types.
Fatalities at level crossings by crossing type
12
Passive
Active - automatic protection
16
6
4
3
5
4
8
2
2
Pedestrian
2012/2013
2010/2011
2009/2010
2013/2014
2012/2013
2011/2012
2010/2011
1
2009/2010
12
5
2013/2014
6
6
0
20
8
2011/2012
8
24
Active - manual protection
LX Collisions
LX collisions
Fatalities
10
4
0
Road vehicle occupant
Source: SMIS. The chart excludes suicides and suspected suicides.
•
There were six pedestrian fatalities and two road vehicle fatalities at level
crossings in 2013/14.
•
At ten, the number of collisions between trains and road vehicles was
below the 10-year average of 12 per year.
•
Most level crossing fatalities occur on passive crossings where the user
plays a greater role in ensuring that it is safe to cross.
25
The Strategic Safety Plan
Trajectories of the 2009–2014 SSP
The 2009–2014 Strategic Safety Plan (SSP) defines a number of trajectories,
each related to a particular aspect of system risk. Trajectories are a way of
illustrating expected changes in the level of risk as a result of the initiatives being
undertaken or planned by the industry.
Risk profile by SSP trajectories
27.2
Passenger slips, trips and falls in stations
12.1
Passenger accidents at the PTI
4.0
Passenger on-board injuries
9.6
Passenger assault
10.8
Infrastructure worker injuries
2.8
Train crew on-board injuries
Train crew assault
0.9
Station staff assault
0.8
Station staff slips, trips and falls
1.1
45.1
Trespass
10.7
Public behaviour at LX
2.6
SPADs, rolling stock, infrastructure & vandalism
15.6
Not covered by an SSP trajectory
0
Fatalities
Weighted injuries
10
20
30
40
50
Risk (modelled FWI per year)
60
Source: SRM v8. Fifteen trajectories have been defined in the SSP, they cover 89% of the total
FWI risk, and 94% of the fatality risk. Those related to train accident risk (SPADs, rolling stock,
infrastructure and vandalism) have been grouped in a single bar in this chart.
•
The SSP trajectories cover 95% of risk to passengers, 66% of risk to the
workforce and 93% of risk to members of the public.
•
At the end of CP4, risk satisfied, or was better than, the trajectory range
for all 15 trajectories set out in the 2009-2014 SSP.
26
Progress against other industry requirements
High Level Output Specification
In the High Level Output Specification (HLOS), the Department for Transport
established safety metrics for both passenger risk and workforce risk, and
specified a requirement for a 3% reduction in both categories over Control
Period 4 (1 April 2009 to 31 March 2014).
The HLOS targets for both risk categories are shown as an index starting at
100% at the beginning of CP4, with a target of 97% for March 2014.
Progress against HLOS target for passenger and workforce risk
200%
180%
160%
Percentage of benchmark
140%
120%
100%
Other passenger injuries
Train accidents
Struck by train on station crossing
Slips, trips and falls
On-board injuries
Assault
Platform edge incidents
Contact with object or person
HLOS benchmark
HLOS target
6.5%
4.7%
40%
20%
0%
Train accidents
Other workforce
Other on-board train crew
Train driver
Infrastructure worker
HLOS benchmark
4.5%
HLOS target
20.8%
80%
60%
Workforce injuries from accidents to others
44.2%
45.1%
7.6%
6.7%
15.9%
16.0%
20.0%
3.4%
17.3%
21.3%
15.8%
7.7%
6.1%
41.5%
20.2%
SRM v6.7
SRM v8
Passengers
SRM v6.7
34.2%
Workforce
SRM v8
Source: SRM
•
The SRM has been used as the primary means of measuring the
performance of the industry against the HLOS over CP4. SRMv6.7 was
used for the beginning of CP4, and SRMv8 has been used at the end of
CP4 (March 2014).
•
It can be seen that both passenger and workforce risk have met the
requirements of the HLOS targets.
27
Learning from Operational Experience
Introduction
The Learning from Operational Experience Annual
Report (LOEAR) is a sister publication to the ASPR, and
captures some of the lessons the GB rail industry has
learnt during 2013/14.
The report looks at learning in areas of general cooperative activity across the industry, and identifies
specific learning points in areas affecting rail users and
employees.
Industry co-operative activities
•
The industry continues to co-operate via a wide
range of learning-related activities and resources,
including: Right Track magazine, CIRAS, research
projects, and the Close Call System.
•
CIRAS received 978 contacts on a diverse range
of topics in 2013/14, of which 216 (22%) became
reports after the screening process. Positive results
included (inter alia) amendments to a non-compliant
coach-lifting procedure, a review of shunting
operations in a large depot, and improvements to
station dispatch arrangements.
Investigations and recommendations
•
During 2013/14, RAIB published 26 reports, 22 of which involved
incidents on the mainline railway. These 22 incidents led to 88
recommendations; the area of infrastructure asset management received
most focus.
•
The Incident Factor Classification System shows communications to be
the dominant factor in incidents involving signalling, featuring in 40% of
reports classified.
28
Learning from Operational Experience
Accident and incident investigations, statistics and other sources of
information are analysed to help focus effort where it is most needed.
This approach enables learning to occur across the following four areas:
Train accidents
•
July 2013 saw four major train accidents occur
across the world: in Canada (6th, 47 fatalities),
France (12th, 6 fatalities), Spain (25th, 79 fatalities)
and Switzerland (29th, 1 fatality). Each reminded
the GB rail industry of the significant reputational
and business risk associated with such accidents.
•
RSSB produced a paper on each of these incidents and measured them
against GB practices and regulations.
•
A fatal collision between a push-pull train and a cow in Germany led to a
cross-industry discussion of the risks from strikes with animals in Great
Britain.
•
RSSB reviewed the lessons learned after a similar accident at Polmont
in 1984. Analysis indicates that the risk from animal strike incidents is
generally low. However, such incidents carry the potential for harm, and
do impact on the commercial aspect of the railway in terms of delays,
cleaning and line clearance.
Photo: Network Rail
Passengers
•
Passenger risk at the platform-train interface (PTI) continues to be an
area of particular industry focus. A number of recent PTI events have
highlighted areas for learning, including the dispatch procedure itself,
the role of the driver, the behaviour of passengers, and door design/
maintenance.
•
The industry has focused on passenger risk at the PTI over the last two
years, via a dedicated task force.
29
Learning from Operational Experience
Workforce
•
The deaths of two rail employees in a road traffic accident in 2013/14
highlight the continuing need for focus on this area.
•
A number of RAIB reports published during the year raised issues for
those managing and working on infrastructure projects. Incidents like the
infrastructure worker fatality at Saxilby (4 December 2012) have raised
questions about (inter-alia) worksite length, the planning of safe systems
of work, location knowledge and the competence of agency staff.
Members of the public
•
Members of the public have a duty to ensure that they use level
crossings in the prescribed manner; the industry has a duty to ensure
both that the prescribed manner is fit for purpose and that its operations
allow the prescribed manner to be followed.
Beyond the railway
•
The industry is mindful of the need to look beyond its own operations for
insights or initiatives. It is also mindful that the key to success is not only
about sharing lessons, but also best practice and ideas.
•
The report therefore presents a number of case studies where this has
been achieved, and highlights RSSB’s summaries of some of the major
non-rail accident public inquiries, which can also offer suggestions for
how your own learning procedures might be improved.
30
Key safety facts
Safety overview
Overview
Fatalities
Passenger
Workforce
Public
Total
Major injuries
Passenger
Workforce
Public
Total
Minor injuries
Passenger
Workforce
Public
Total
Shock/trauma
Passenger
Workforce
Public
Total
Fatalities and weighted injuries
Passenger
Workforce
Public
Total
Suicide and attempted suicide
Suicides
FWI
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
5
3
60
68
7
1
33
41
5
1
47
53
4
2
42
48
4
3
29
36
234
123
38
395
251
122
36
409
259
128
40
427
312
114
42
468
270
126
44
440
5308
5327
190
10825
5600
5379
186
11165
5954
5432
186
11572
6382
4757
176
11315
6307
4913
162
11382
207
1169
4
1380
226
1156
4
1386
262
1239
3
1504
238
964
6
1208
235
1001
2
1238
38.76
25.19
64.26
128.2
42.95
23.28
37.11
103.3
42.64
24.41
51.49
118.5
47.44
22.81
46.69
116.9
43.10
25.16
33.85
102.1
238
240.7
207
210.7
249
251.4
246
249.5
279
284.5
31
Key safety facts
Train accidents
Train accidents
Fatalities (excluding suicides)
Passengers
Workforce
Members of the public
Weighted injuries (excluding suicides)
Passengers
Workforce
Members of the public
Total train accidents
PHRTAs
Involving passenger trains
Collisions between trains
Derailments
Collisions with road vehicles not at LC
Collisions with road vehicles at LC (not derailed)
Collisions with road vehicles at LC (derailed)
Striking buffer stops
Struck by large falling object
Not involving passenger trains
Collisions between trains
Derailments
Collisions with road vehicles not at LC
Collisions with road vehicles at LC (not derailed)
Collisions with road vehicles at LC (derailed)
Striking buffer stops
Struck by large falling object
Non-PHRTA train accidents
Involving passenger trains
Open door collisions
Roll back collisions
Striking animals
Struck by missiles
Train fires
Striking level crossing gates/barriers
Striking other objects
Not involving passenger trains
Open door collisions
Roll back collisions
Striking animals
Struck by missiles
Train fires
Striking level crossing gates/barriers
Striking other objects
PIM risk estimate (FWI per year)
Public behaviour
SPAD
Trains and rolling stock
Operational incidents
Environmental
Infrastructure
2009/10
7
0
0
7
1.18
0.39
0.57
0.21
577
42
26
4
8
2
0
12
0
0
16
0
12
2
0
2
0
0
535
469
1
3
144
141
68
2
110
66
1
0
16
22
6
4
17
7.40
3.20
0.90
0.30
0.90
0.80
1.30
2010/11
0
0
0
0
1.40
0.71
0.50
0.20
520
18
14
1
5
0
1
4
2
1
4
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
502
440
0
6
168
90
53
7
116
62
0
2
19
8
9
1
23
8.13
3.31
0.98
0.35
1.28
0.94
1.26
2011/12
1
0
0
1
0.83
0.16
0.35
0.32
545
33
18
5
0
2
2
7
2
0
15
1
13
0
0
0
1
0
512
432
0
1
169
57
43
2
160
80
0
0
21
10
8
2
39
7.24
3.35
0.70
0.42
1.12
0.68
0.97
2012/13
6
0
0
6
0.40
0.05
0.22
0.12
694
35
21
5
7
2
0
7
0
0
14
1
9
1
0
3
0
0
659
561
0
4
324
66
40
1
126
98
0
0
22
6
11
1
58
7.90
3.54
0.68
0.45
1.06
0.57
1.60
2013/14
2
0
0
2
0.55
0.22
0.32
0.01
627
32
17
5
0
1
0
8
3
0
15
1
11
0
0
2
1
0
595
516
0
0
268
50
30
5
163
79
0
0
26
3
5
0
45
7.52
3.17
0.81
0.25
1.27
0.39
1.63
The category collisions with road vehicles (not at LC) excludes accidents that result in a derailment; these
incidents are included in the derailments category. Similarly the derailments category excludes derailments
resulting from collisions between trains, collisions with road vehicles at level crossings and trains struck by
large falling objects.
32
Key safety facts
PIM precursors
PIM precursors
Public behaviour
Bridge strikes
Non Rail vehicles on the line
Non-Passenger trains striking objects due to vandalism
Passenger trains striking objects due to vandalism
Public behaviour (Active automatic level crossings)
Public behaviour (Active manual level crossings)
Public behaviour (Passive level crossings)
SPADs
SPADs
Trains and rolling stock
Non-Passenger defects (other than brake/control)
Passenger defects (other than brake/control)
Brake/control defects
Operational incidents
Displaced or insecure loads
Objects foul of the line
Other issues
Routing
Signaller errors other than routing
Track issues
Affecting level crossings
Runaway trains
Train Speeding (approaching bufferstops)
Train Speeding (non-passenger)
Train Speeding (passenger)
Environmental
Adhesion
LC incidents due to weather (Active automatic)
LC incidents due to weather (Active manual)
LC incidents due to weather (Passive)
Non-Passenger trains running into other obstructions
Non-Passenger trains running into trees
Passenger trains running into other obstructions
Passenger trains running into trees
Infrastructure
Animals on the line
Broken fishplates
Broken rails
Buckled rails
Culvert failures
Cutting failures
Embankment failures
Flooding
Gauge faults
LC failures (Active automatic)
LC failures (Passive)
Overline bridge failures
Rail bridge failures
Retaining wall failures
S&C faults
Tunnel failures
Twist and geometry faults
Wrongside signalling failures
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
1598
59
4
43
43
12
83
1541
65
7
38
40
6
85
1507
57
7
20
48
19
67
1634
47
3
33
40
7
65
299
277
250
293
6
51
23
7
42
33
10
51
19
5
32
6
27
366
365
2110
23
136
83
6
11
55
79
29
332
366
2073
21
172
81
6
10
60
73
19
307
365
2057
19
157
74
2
12
42
81
27
272
365
1987
18
129
87
5
14
41
104
206
4
4
3
11
17
61
62
82
2
4
0
19
30
84
242
155
3
4
0
21
39
97
232
280
1
5
1
17
125
129
551
1529
402
199
41
4
39
10
39
2
863
578
9
12
2
646
9
19
10115
1543
362
129
12
3
30
3
31
3
729
612
10
21
4
570
5
8
9442
1667
431
180
10
6
150
49
223
4
977
985
14
33
5
408
8
8
8842
1622
327
121
19
25
137
45
121
3
837
924
28
61
6
386
11
12
9049
33
Key safety facts
Passengers
Passengers
Fatalities
Train accidents
Slips, trips, and falls
Platform-train interface
Assault and abuse
On-board injuries
Contact with object or person
Struck by train on station crossing
Other type of passenger injury
Major injuries
Train accidents
Slips, trips, and falls
Platform-train interface
Assault and abuse
On-board injuries
Contact with object or person
Struck by train on station crossing
Other type of passenger injury
Minor injuries
Class 1
Class 2
Incidents of shock
Class 1
Class 2
Fatalities and weighted injuries
Train accidents
Slips, trips, and falls
Platform-train interface
Assault and abuse
On-board injuries
Contact with object or person
Struck by train on station crossing
Other type of passenger injury
Passenger kms (billions)
Passenger journeys (millions)
2009/10
5
0
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
234
3
145
43
9
26
7
0
1
5308
1209
4099
207
2
205
38.76
0.39
21.23
10.48
1.34
3.84
1.35
0.00
0.12
51.42
1259
2010/11
7
0
1
5
1
0
0
0
0
251
6
158
45
10
25
5
0
2
5600
1250
4350
226
5
221
42.95
0.71
22.71
11.82
2.49
3.71
1.24
0.01
0.26
54.48
1356
2011/12
5
0
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
259
1
172
48
11
21
6
0
0
5954
1375
4579
262
5
257
42.64
0.16
25.75
10.28
1.58
3.42
1.40
0.00
0.05
57.31
1462
2012/13
4
0
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
312
0
203
64
10
26
6
1
2
6382
1403
4979
238
3
235
47.44
0.05
28.58
10.71
2.38
3.99
1.36
0.10
0.27
58.41
1503
2013/14
4
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
270
1
181
49
5
28
6
0
0
6307
1382
4925
235
7
228
43.10
0.22
25.05
11.31
0.95
4.13
1.36
0.00
0.07
60.14
1590
Incidents of passenger trespass, suspected and attempted suicide are analysed under public risk and
counted in the key safety fact sheet for members of the public.
34
Key safety facts
Workforce
Workforce
Fatalities
Infrastructure worker
Train driver
Other on-board train crew
Station staff
Revenue protection
Other workforce
Major injuries
Infrastructure worker
Train driver
Other on-board train crew
Station staff
Revenue protection
Other workforce
Minor injuries
Class 1
Class 2
Incidents of shock
Class 1
Class 2
Total FWI
Infrastructure worker
Train driver
Other on-board train crew
Station staff
Revenue protection
Other workforce
2009/10
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
123
74
10
18
8
4
9
5327
557
4770
1169
291
878
25.19
12.05
3.07
5.42
2.20
1.07
1.38
35
2010/11
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
122
75
11
12
8
4
12
5379
585
4794
1156
302
854
23.28
10.36
3.32
4.79
2.1
1.03
1.65
2011/12
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
128
67
12
18
10
5
16
5432
662
4770
1239
323
916
24.41
10.06
3.55
5.28
2.3
1.14
2.12
2012/13
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
114
68
16
14
7
4
5
4757
597
4160
964
325
639
22.81
11.04
3.77
4.22
1.9
0.88
1.04
2013/14
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
126
79
9
8
11
5
14
4913
560
4353
1001
351
650
25.16
13.48
3.18
3.37
2.2
0.96
1.94
Key safety facts
Public
Public
Trespass
Fatalities
Major injuries
Minor injuries
Shock/trauma
Total trespass FWI
Level crossings
Fatalities
Major injuries
Minor injuries
Shock/trauma
Total level crossings FWI
Non-trespass non-LX
Fatalities
Major injuries
Minor injuries
Shock/trauma
Total non-trespass non-LX FWI
Total public accidental FWI
Fatalities
Major injuries
Minor injuries
Shock/trauma
Total accidental FWI
Suicide
Fatalities
Major injuries
Minor injuries
Shock/trauma
Total suicide FWI
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
46
19
36
1
48.04
25
18
30
1
26.92
40
15
26
1
41.60
32
28
30
1
34.92
21
26
23
1
23.68
13
7
24
2
13.75
6
5
20
1
6.56
4
8
25
1
4.87
9
5
28
4
9.58
8
4
15
0
8.44
1
12
130
1
2.47
2
13
136
2
3.63
3
17
135
1
5.02
1
9
118
1
2.19
0
14
124
1
1.73
60
3.80
0.45
0.02
64.26
33
3.60
0.49
0.01
37.11
47
4.00
0.49
0.01
51.49
42
4.20
0.47
0.02
46.69
29
4.40
0.44
0.01
33.85
238
26
15
1
240.67
207
36
17
0
210.67
249
23
21
1
251.39
246
34
16
0
249.47
279
54
25
3
284.52
36
Key safety facts
Road-rail interface
Road-rail interface
Fatalities at LC (level crossings)
Pedestrians
Passenger on station crossing
Member of public
Road vehicle occupants
Train occupants
Passenger on train
Workforce on train
Weighted injuries at LC
Pedestrians
Road vehicle occupants
Train occupants
Suicide and attempted suicide
Suicide
Attempted suicide
Collisions with road vehicles at LC
Resulting in derailment
Collisions with gates or barriers at LC
Gates
Barriers
Reported near misses
With pedestrians
With road vehicles
Reported incidents of crossing events
With pedestrians
With road vehicles
Vehicle incursions
Via fences
Via bridges
Via level crossings
Via access points
Number foul of the track
Number struck by trains
Train struck by falling vehicle
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
33
0.11
14
0
6
6
0
405
247
158
2523
899
1624
50
27
1
17
5
31
5
0
26
0.20
5
1
8
6
2
454
306
148
2936
1365
1571
59
30
2
23
4
33
0
1
25
0.11
9
2
4
3
1
470
322
148
3828
1807
2021
65
30
1
28
6
38
2
0
25
0.21
10
0
2
2
0
439
294
145
3514
1798
1716
57
25
0
22
10
34
4
0
37
0.22
10
0
5
2
3
409
279
130
3989
2104
1885
48
24
1
15
8
22
1
0
13
8
0
8
5
0
0
0
1.02
0.69
0.21
0.12
37
6
6
0
6
0
0
0
0
1.20
0.48
0.10
0.62
4
3
0
3
1
0
0
0
1.16
0.57
0.32
0.27
9
4
0
4
5
0
0
0
0.90
0.70
0.12
0.08
8
6
0
6
2
0
0
0
0.66
0.55
0.01
0.10
Definitions and scope
Scope. The report relates to the mainline railway in Great Britain. The
analysis covers events that take place on trains, in mainline stations and
on Network Rail managed infrastructure (such as the track and the area
around it). Workforce fatalities in depots, yards and sidings are included, but
other incidents in these locations are not. Suicides, suspected suicides and
attempted suicides are generally excluded from the statistics presented in the
charts in this booklet unless otherwise stated.
Person type. A person working for a company in the rail industry,
either as a contractor or a direct employee, is classed as a member of the
workforce while they are on duty. Someone on a train or in a station in
connection with a journey they have just made, or are about to undertake, is a
passenger. Anyone else is a member of the public.
Injury degree. Injuries that involve serious harm, such as a loss of
consciousness or a broken limb, are classed as major injuries, as is any
injury that requires attendance at hospital for over 24 hours. Other physical
injuries are classed as minor injuries. The railway measures overall harm
in terms of fatalities and weighted injuries (FWI). See page 39 for more
information.
Data sources. Most of the statistics presented in this report are
derived from the rail industry’s Safety Management Information System
(SMIS), and usually cover the ten-year period from 2004/05 to 2013/14. The
charts showing the risk profile are based on the industry’s Safety Risk Model
(SRM). Data sources are referenced in the relevant charts.
38
Fatalities and weighted injuries
The table shows the number of each injury type that is deemed to be
‘statistically equivalent’ to one fatality. The weightings direct safety
expenditure towards those incidents and accidents that lead to the highest
levels of risk without ignoring the types of incident that typically have less
severe outcomes.
Injury degrees and weightings
Injury degree
Definition
Fatality
Death occurs within one year of the accident.
Major injury
Injuries to passengers, staff or members of the
public as defined in schedule 1 to RIDDOR 1995
amended April 2012. This includes losing
consciousness, most fractures, major dislocations,
loss of sight (temporary or permanent) and other
injuries that resulted in hospital attendance for
more than 24 hours.
10
Injuries to passengers, staff or members of the
public, which are neither fatalities nor major
injuries, and:
- for passengers or public, result in the injured
person being taken to hospital from the scene of
the accident (as defined as reportable in RIDDOR
1995 amended April 2012)
- for workforce, result in the injured person being
incapacitated for their normal duties for more than
three consecutive calendar days, not including the
day of the injury.
200
Class 1 minor injury
Ratio
Class 2 minor injury
All other physical injuries.
Class 1 shock /
trauma
Shock or trauma resulting from being involved in,
or witnessing, events that have serious potential for
a fatal outcome, eg train accidents such as
collisions and derailments, or a person being
struck by train.
Class 2 shock /
trauma
Shock or trauma resulting from other causes, such
as verbal abuse and near misses, or personal
accidents of a typically non-fatal outcome.
1
1000
200
1000
RIDDOR refers to the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations, a set
of health and safety regulations that mandate the reporting of, inter alia, work-related accidents. These
regulations were first published in 1985, and have been amended and updated several times. In
2012, there was an amendment to the RIDDOR 1995 criteria for RIDDOR-reportable workforce minor
injuries from three days to seven days. For the purposes of the industry’s safety performance analysis,
the more-than-three-days criterion has been maintained, as well as the category termed Class 1
minor injury. In the latest version of RIDDOR, published 2013, the term ‘major injury’ was dropped;
the regulation now uses the term ‘specified injuries’ to refer to a slightly different scope of injuries than
those that were classed as major. Again, for consistency in industry safety performance analysis, the
term ‘major injury’ has been maintained, along with the associated definition from RIDDOR 1995.
39
Further information
For further information on safety performance, readers are referred to the full
version of the ASPR, which is available from the RSSB website. Access to the
charts and data contained in the ASPR are also available on the website:
www.rssb.co.uk
SRM information and other tools, including the new interactive ASPR
Dashboard, are accessible to registered users of the SRM web portal:
www.safetyriskmodel.co.uk
To discuss any of the information in this Key Facts and Figures booklet, or the
full version of the ASPR, contact:
Andrew Clinton
Senior Safety Intelligence Analyst
020 3142 5454
andrew.clinton@rssb.co.uk
For general questions about RSSB safety performance analysis, contact:
Liz Davies
Safety Intelligence Strategy Manager
020 3142 5475
liz.davies@rssb.co.uk
For information or queries about RSSB in general, contact:
RSSB enquiry desk
020 3142 5400
enquirydesk@rssb.co.uk
40
RSSB Block 2 Angel Square 1 Torrens Street London EC1V 1NY
www.rssb.co.uk