Safety fears over gas job cuts; privatisation issues raised--Transco not hitting targets

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Safety fears over gas job cuts; privatisation issues raised--Transco not hitting targets

Source: The Herald Publication date: Feb 04, 2000

A TRADE union claimed yesterday that safety standards in the gas industry have fallen since privatisation because of thousands of job losses made necessary by demands from the industry regulator to reduce operating costs.

The GMB said the gas transportation company, Transco, was failing to achieve targets of attending reported gas escapes because of the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets' (Ofgem) control of operating expenditure, and warned that the safety of customers and its members was being compromised. The claim followed the publication of figures by the Public Accounts Committee which showed that, in 1998, Transco reached no more than the target of 97% of uncontrolled gas escapes within an hour - 40,000 cases fewer than it reached in 1993 and 1994.

Committee members called on Ofgem to examine the risk to households as a result of the deterioration in performance.

However, Transco, which is responsible for safety in the gas industry, insisted yesterday that it had met or exceeded safety standards set by the regulatory body and the Health and Safety Executive in the past three years.

It said it had achieved the 97%-in-the-hour target in the past two or three years and stressed that it had attended 98% of gas cases within an hour last year. The company also said safety remained a key priority and denied suggestions that it was unable to cope with increased demand in Scotland, after the huge explosion which killed a family of four at their home in Larkhall, Lanarkshire, just before Christmas. Mr John Moist, a GMB organiser who represents members in the gas industry, said: "I think there are very definite links between Transco's performance and job cuts, which I don't just put down to Transco.

"The driving force, to a very large extent, has been the control of operating expenditure by the regulator . . . . which is insisting on driving down costs within Transco to a level the regulator deems to be appropriate. "That inevitably meant that, in a company that has a very high proportion of direct labour, jobs would go, and we have maintained that sacrificing jobs was inevitably impacting on the service delivery and in particular on the response rates to reported gas leaks.

"That has health and safety implications for both our members and for customers and, if the response rate is below the levels expected by the Government, then I would say that our fears have been borne out.

"Failing to exceed the 97% target means there is an enormous number of reported gas escapes throughout the country that are not being attended within the hour and that could have tragic consequences. I don't know of any case where a response time has been directly linked to any particular accident, but the potential is there."

A spokesman for Transco said: "Normally in Scotland we have 88 teams of two workers who deal with safety - backed up by 135 teams of two from contractors.

"But, since Larkhall, there has been increased sensitivity to anything that smells of gas, so we have increased cover from the rest of the company to 102 teams from Transco and 149 from contractors." He conceded that, since1994 when Transco was formed, its workforce has fallen from 20,000 to 14,000 throughout the UK but stressed that "Transco will never put safety anywhere other than at the top of our priority list".

He added: "Safety standards have not fallen. These figures are audited and we know precisely where we are.

"We will, of course, be happy to co-operate with Ofgem and the HSE to discuss any changes, but we have either met or exceeded the targets in the last two or three years."

Publication date: Feb 04, 2000 ) 2000, NewsReal, Inc.

Link

http://beta.newsreal.com/cgi-bin/NewsService?osform_template=pages/newsrealStory&ID=newsreal&storypath=News/Story_2000_02_05.NRdb@2@7@3@176&path=News/Category.NRdb@2@16@2@1

-- Carl Jenkins (Somewherepress@aol.com), February 05, 2000

Answers

PG&E may do the same thing in the future. They are waiting for a ruling for their rate case that is before the CPUC. Of course rumors are flying, but due to deregulation, the judge said PG&E must provide "adequate" service. That depends on what adequate means to both parties. Of course safety will not be compromised, but will service be compromised?

-- bardou (bardou@baloneyyy.xcom), February 05, 2000.

AAHH,PRIVATISATION.....license to steal,rip off,galore.Look around,the Ruins of Privatisation and DEREGULATION are visible everywhere!!

-- Victimized (victim@of Privatisation.ko), February 06, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ