The reporter has raised a safety concern relating the monitoring of Protection Officer (PO) qualifications.
The reporter states, POs within the Network Maintenance group are concerned they may not be qualified to be conducting safe work duties as requested by their supervisors. Protection Officer qualifications are assessed annually, except for new starters that require assessment at [various] monthly intervals then annually ongoing. The reporter further states, in order to remain qualified, Supervisors and Coordinators conduct PO monitoring with resultant paperwork sent to the training team for record keeping. A selection of qualified duties to be conducted by POs include but are not limited to:
- setting up safe working protection on individual track sections
- completing safe working forms
- liaison with the network control officer
- lookout for actual works being conducted
- in-field protection involving the setting up of stop boards and railway track signals.
The reporter advised that the operator conducted a PO qualification monitoring review on [date]. The purpose of the review was to evaluate the effectiveness of the 12-month monitoring of POs within the Network Maintenance group. The review specifically related to whether formal monitoring is being consistently implemented for all POs to ensure that their skills and knowledge are being applied correctly. Additionally, the review examined whether the documented evidence was complete and whether the POs are performing their roles in compliance with the relevant sections of the operator's rules and procedures.
The review of the PO annual monitoring records identified several critical issues that require attention. Inconsistencies were observed in the completion and recording of monitoring sessions including missing or incomplete checklists. Additional problems were identified regarding the storage and management of records. There were gaps in the POs learning management system (LMS) history, and the operator has not consistently retained essential safety training documentation for the required duration. Key recommendations to address the issues and strengthen the monitoring and record keeping process were identified. One of the recommendations included a comprehensive review to be undertaken to ensure that all PO 12-month monitoring records for Network Maintenance are accurate and up to date. This review should include verification that all qualifications held by the PO have been completed and remain current.
The reporter is concerned that despite the above review and completion of the identified recommendations, POs are still not confident they are qualified to be conducting their duties.
The reporter acknowledged a new LMS has recently been introduced, however it has not been updated with PO qualification records. As a result, POs and their supervisors are not able to confirm qualifications are current when referring to the LMS records.
The reporter finally states, there are currently some large projects such as [project name] with large amounts of rail safety workers being deployed. The reporter is further concerned of potentially unqualified people being sent into the field to perform safe working duties putting everyone at risk.
[Operator] acknowledges the reporter's concerns and the ATSB's interest in the matter.
The [Operator] Safety and Environment Management System (SEMS) outlines the minimum requirements for obtaining, maintaining and monitoring Protection Officer accreditation for performing Protection Officer duties on the [Operator] network.
[Operator] has completed a review of a significant percentage of Protection Officer records within Network Maintenance and confirmed that individual qualifications are compliant with the operator's SEMS. [Operator] will take the opportunity to improve the quality of record keeping for associated training documentation. This is specifically in relation to localised record keeping improvement and in no way changes the validity of any Protection Officer qualification.
The relevant [Operator] Protection Officer rostering systems have protocols and governance steps in place to ensure that duties are assigned to Protection Officer staff relevant to their qualification;, this includes when supporting major projects such as [project name].
Further to the detailed training requirements, [Operator] facilitates in-depth rail safety briefings for all Protection Officers supporting major closures such as weekend rail corridor maintenance and project closures. This provides an environment for all Protection Officers to ask questions or raise concerns in relation to the safe working components of their work to ensure that they are clear and confident to conduct the duties in which they are qualified to perform.
From a system functionality perspective, the statement, 'As a result, POs and their supervisors are not able to confirm qualifications are current when referring to the LMS records' is incorrect. The data that is being presented within the operator's Learning Management System (LMS) is a reflection of the historical data within the existing LMS.
LMS has been structured in a way that any individual can see their progress and learning history at any time they are required to. To assist, all [Operator] employees have access to quick reference guides / support materials on our centralised organisation portal page -LMS support.
The project team continues to work with key business areas around the allocation of PO qualifications (now referred to as Items) and are available to support localised record keeping practices.
[Operator] would also like to take the opportunity to meet to discuss if any further information is required by the ATSB.
ONRSR confirms receipt of ATSB REPCON RR2025-00011, dated 25 June 2025, regarding protection officer qualification monitoring processes. ONRSR has reviewed the reporter’s concerns and operator’s response.
Track worker safety and rail safety worker competencies has been a focus of regulatory interactions across the operator’s network. ONRSR has scheduled a site visit to obtain further information from the operator and validate their response to this REPCON.