Going by the title of the post, I will most likely be accused of rabid departmentalism. But let me assure that it was meant more to catch your eye rather than indicating my prejudice towards any particular wing of our organization. And of all adverse traits in my working, I am least accused of being departmental.
Over the last 10 years, I have observed that we tend to hammer and tongs over the engineers and their proposals and their manner of working. At times, we even tend to overdo it. But I am of the opinion that we will not be able to contribute to the organization effectively unless we understand the working of Operating department, make its working more cost efficient and help bring down the unit cost of transportation of freight and passengers. This is why I think so.
1. Operating Department directly controls the expenditure under the heads 6D, 8F, 9G, 10H and indirectly controls the expenditure on track maintenance,
motive power maintenance and that of plant and equipment.
2. The expenditure on Operating staff, especially running staff and even station staff, their OT and other allowances is probably the highest in terms of cost
per head.
3. The movement of trains have significant financial implications which their controllers can't appreciate.
4. For the Operating Department, especially in freight oriented divisions like BSP, CKP, DHN, ASN etc., the number of wagons loaded is important and not the
lead factor. Even the incurrence of wasteful loading-related expenditure is overlooked to achieve their targets.
But at the same time, the Operating Department is perhaps the most important and it is said that a DRM's CR is related to the performance of his Sr.DOM.
They have to display the maximum vision to maximize traffic growth. And their growing clout in the organization is quite visible over the last 3-4 years in the
higher echelons.
However, over the last two years in this division, I have observed that the working of Operating Department is defective, whimsical, domineering to the extent
that it places excessive strain on our assets, especially track and signalling equipment, and most importantly, financially inefficient. Besides, they are the
least accountable even from the integrity point of view. But at the end of the day, they take the credit for excellent loading performance and get the maximum
awards doled out every April and other occasions. And somehow, I find our Department wanting on their focus on these aspects.
Firstly, the basis for achieving the freight traffic targets and the expenditure to be incurred on operations is theoretically based on the power plan for the
division, which is decided by HQ. How this power plan is arrived at is any one's guess. It is based more on rule of thumb rather than application of any
scientific method. More so, this power plan is very important even from the financial point of view but Finance is nowhere involved with it. Once the power
plan is circulated, it is to be assumed that the average daily loco holding of the division should be around the same locos as mentioned in the power plan with
minor variations. But when I happened to see the loco holding statistics of April and May the previous year, the loco holding was more by 20-25%. This means I
(the division) incur a greater expenditure on the running staff (OT, mileage, BRA etc.), the detentions are far greater due to network congestion and besides,
there is an increased strain on track. Besides, a greater expenditure is incurred on Loco hire charges and the IRFC lease charges (if I am not wrong).
Secondly, their control over the sidings is loosening as the time progresses. For example, in Junadih (the largest coal siding in IR with four spurs), the
siding authorities are supposed to clear the coal dust on the track frequently. This is not ensured and thus increased power in the form of an additional loco
is used to draw the load, especially during the monsoons. This sometimes results in the breakage of the couplings and even derailments occur, thereby
increasing the detention of loads in the siding. All this is done because the Operating authorities want to clear the siding without bothering to ensure that
the siding fellows clean up the track. A completely terrible, high cost, inefficient system of loading, all done to ensure that the loading targets don't
suffer.
Thirdly, their crew ordering system is inefficient as well. I went on a joint night inspection along with Sr.DEE (OP) to a crew lobby where I saw a LP and an
ALP sitting idle for almost three hours and there was no train due to arrive at the station. When I raised the issue with him, he says that the detention of
the crew is far higher than what I saw. Sometimes, the crew has to return home without boarding the loco or running the train for 1-2 block sections, duly
drawing their idle time allowance. All this at a time when our division is running at 65% of the sanctioned strength of running staff. This further aggravates
the shortage of crew and increases the detention of loads due to want of crew. All this is so financially damaging. So when Sr.DOM sent me the guard review
proposal, which was calculated based on an assumed PDD (pre-departure detention) of 2 hrs, I asked him to revise it to 90 minutes. He did so under the pressure
from DRM and I was able to curtail 15 additional posts of guards.
Fourthly, their cadre management is probably the poorest and their cadre is the most indisciplined as well. They do not pinpoint the posts according to the
workload, which increases the expenditure on OT. For example the BSP lobby has a shortage of 30% of guards while in the other crew lobbies, it is less than
10%. Thus a phenomenal amount of expenditure on OT/BRA is incurred for the guards of BSP lobby. A few guards even have a monthly pay of more than Rs.60,000 -
more than what our GMs draw today. They do not conduct the job analysis of all stations regularly and when they do, our SOs and the PIs who are the members,
are completely guided by the findings of the DTI/TI. Most of the SOs and PIs do not stay at the station during the period.
Fifthly, the movement of loads is also not systematic. There are instances of an empty load travelling on a particular route suddenly diverted to a siding on a
different route, wasting important time on reversing the load and increasing the detention in that station. Again, unnecessary expenditure being incurred.
My take is that we should start looking at plugging such wasteful expenditure and leakages in revenue. We should start accessing the statements being generated
in their offices like the loco holding statements, rake detention statements, crew utilization statements and try and bring about a greater financial
discipline in operations. We also need to have a better idea of costing whereby we should be able to financially quantify the cost of detentions of wagon
loads.
What say all of you? Are there people who hold similar views or my findings are confined to Bilaspur division alone?
R.Ananth
Sr.DFM/BSP
