RSSB published the results of the 2023 Rail Industry Fatigue Survey in May this year, providing an industry-wide snapshot of fatigue and alertness. I was struck by several findings, including that two in five respondents had experienced a safety event influenced by fatigue while at their current company.
When you compare this stat with those from formal incident sources, such as Safe Insights, it does seem higher, indicating that fatigue is underreported. It’s also higher than the one in six that was reported in 2018, when industry first ran a fatigue survey.
The results also reveal that 47% of respondents had to try to stay awake at work at least once a week in the month before the survey. In addition, 22% had excessive general daytime sleepiness—an increase from 21% in 2018.
For context, 63% of the 4,143 survey respondents worked at a TOC. Of the overall respondent group, 66% were shift workers—including all areas of the rail community. Across all respondents, the top three roles were ‘passenger train driver’, ‘office-based’, and ‘manager’. The report provides a detailed breakdown.
Slow progress since initial survey
The results indicate that many of the risk patterns seen in 2018 either haven’t changed substantially or have regressed. I think progress has been slower than we’d hoped because fatigue is an extremely complex issue. It’s influenced by organisational culture, shift design, operational pressures, and individual behaviours.
The data does show that fatigue risk awareness and guidance have been growing, especially since 2018, but embedding this into everyday practice is taking time. In many cases, operational demands and resourcing challenges have made it difficult for organisations to prioritise fatigue risk alongside other pressing issues.
To gain traction in fatigue risk management, we really need to turn this increased awareness into consistent, system-wide change. Think of the difference we’d see if companies invested in no-jeopardy fatigue reporting, for instance.
Top-down leadership is a must
Stronger leadership and commitment are essential in driving meaningful progress, as are continued collaboration and better use of shared data. We need senior managers to understand why managing fatigue risk is important. And we need them to know that a resilient rail network and good fatigue management go hand in hand.
Without their support and buy-in for change, we’ll struggle to get where we need to be. A single voice in an organisation—be it the fatigue manager’s or even the head of safety’s—can’t deliver the necessary change.
The survey results contain a huge amount of useful data from which the industry can benefit. Please, use it as a catalyst for informed, collaborative action across the industry. It highlights common patterns, risk areas, and perceptions that can help us target our interventions going forward.