TRAIN LIGHTING DEPOTS

1
TRAIN LIGHTING DEPOTS

• AN IN DEPTH STUDY
• OF MANPOWER PRODUCTIVITY

2
WORK CONTENT (TRAIN LIGHTING DEPOT) ACTIVITIES
PERFORMED
(i) Primary Maintenance at pit-line (includes A,
B and C schedules) 1. Maintenance of alternator,
suspension arrangement, tension gears,
V-Belts 2. Safety check of axle pulley,
alternator pulley 3. Check for the earth
leakage in wiring 4. Maintenance of regulators 5.
Maintenance of battery, battery boxes 6.
Maintenance of lights and fans 7. Safety check
for under-frame suspension
3
WORK CONTENT (TRAIN LIGHTING DEPOT) ACTIVITIES
PERFORMED
(ii) Secondary Maintenance at Pit Lines. 1.
Safety checks of alternator, suspension
arrangement 2. Availability of V-belt. 3.
Suspension of all under-frame equipment. 4.
Functional check of battery, lights fans. (iii)
Platform attention of passing through trains 1.
Obtaining arrival remarks of coaches a
communicating . 2. Obtaining condition and
attention, if required (iv) Sick Line
Activities 1. Failure attention 2. Cell
replacement 3. Alternator replacement
testing 4. Regulator V-belt replacement
4
YARDSTICKS AND DEPLOYMENT

• YARDSTICK FOR ELECTRICAL STAFF
• Pri . Maintenance 0.3 men per coach holding
• Sec. Maintenance 0.15 ....do..
• Train passing 0.06-0.07...do.
• Ref Bds Policy circular No.RB/EL 03/04
  dt.22.11.04
• (Notice that the yardstick is on the basis of
  coach holding)

5
YARDSTICKS AND DEPLOYMENT

• YARDSTICK FOR MECHANICAL STAFF
• Pri . Maintenance 1.2/1/0.8 men/coach per day
• (sf,m/e,pass)
• Sec. Maintenance 0.6/ 0.5/0.4 men/coach per day
• (sf,m/e,pass)
• Ref Bds Policy circular No.2000/M(C)/143/5
  dt.24.12.01
• (Notice that the yardstick is on the basis of
  coaches handled per day)

6

• HOW MUCH IS THE DIFFERENCE ?

7

• Comparison of two depots
• Trivandrum has been asking for more posts based
  on the Boards yardstick.

8
COMPARISON

• MAS DEPOTS
• Coach holding 1345
• Staff strength 2505
• Ratio 1.86

• TVC DEPOTS
• Coach holding 1450
• Staff strength 1016
• Ratio 0.7

It would appear that there is ample
justification, as MAS is 2.65 times more
comfortable !
9
COMPARISON

• But take a look at this
• MAS TVC
• Coaches maintained per day 552 420
• Staff strength 2505 1016
• Ratio (Men per coach per day) 4.54 2.42
  

MAS is only 1.87 times more comfortable
10
Bench marks conveyed by board

• No bench mark has been
• conveyed for TL depots. Only
• data have been collected.

11
Work study done in TL Depots
12
Manpower Requirement over Southern Railway(TL)
13
NO. OF SERVICES OVER SOUTHERN RAILWAY
14
ABSTRACT OF RAKES MAINTAINED DIVISION/SHEDWISE
15
ABSTRACT OF COACH MAINTAINED DIVISION/ SHEDWISE
16
ANALYSISDISTRIBUTION OF MANPOWER

• Gr D and Gr C in
• Electrical and Mechanical

17
STAFF STRENGTH OF MECHANICAL DEPT - ALL RAILWAYS
18
STAFF STRENGTH OF ELECTRICAL DEPT - ALL
RAILWAYS
19
Gr.C Gr.D TO TOTAL OF ELEC. MECH. DEPARTMENTS
20
COMPARISON OF STAFF STRENGTH OF MECHANICAL
ELECTRICAL DEPTS.
21
COMPARITIVE DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN ELEC. MECH.
DEPTS
22
COMMENTS ON STAFF PRODUCTIVITY

• The yardstick should be for rakes/coaches
  attended to on a day as against the present per
  coach holding.
• Applying the yardstick, a number of posts have to
  be created for TVC division based on coach
  holding.
• But in reality when worked out on coaches
  attended to on a day basis the requirement will
  be much reduced.

23
COMMENTS ON STAFF PRODUCTIVITY

• MULTISKILLING Holds potential
• OUTSOURCING Limited relevance
• AUTOMATION / MECHANISATION
• Integrated Maintenance has not happened