Merseyrail has far too many stops for a traditional guard to do much ticket checking. Merseyrail's new role is safety critical without having dispatch risk. They are only signalling to the driver that they are onboard the train. The 777s are not allowed to be used in passenger service without them.
Agreed re. the first sentence, but that isn’t the case on outer Southern routes (are you familiar with them?). The inner Southern routes have been fully DOO for years and don’t carry OBS.
Its very strange that there appears to be a group that only wants a second person onboard if they have dispatch risk.
Nobody has said they
only want a second person if they take dispatch risk, as far as I can tell?
As a passenger I would rather have a second person aboard than not, but I want that second person to do something meaningful. Based on my experience, and claims in this thread, it appears that the GTR OBS is providing less value than guards at similar operations such as SE mainline, for example. No great surprise - that’s what the role was intended to achieve, to facilitate ultimate removal.
If the next government decided to introduce OBS on more DOO services wouldn't that be an improvement for passengers?
Well, if that happens (it won’t), we can discuss it. Here’s a question: why do you think GTR didn’t do this when their guards were downgraded (and why did the DfT engage in a protracted industrial dispute to downgrade the role?)
Could it be because the role wasn’t about improving customer service at all, and was merely about cost reduction?
I’m not saying I’m necessarily a fan of DOO, however it’s hard to argue that some of the already-extant schemes tend to work reasonably well without issues. GN suburban is a good example of that. However these areas tend to have characteristics which lend themselves to it being a decent method of working, which don’t necessarily apply everywhere. Features like frequent stops, plenty of staff around (it’s actually quite rare to be on a Thameslink service on the GN side that *doesn’t* have some kind of additional staff presence on it, albeit normally people travelling “pass” or to/from work).
There’s certainly a bit of what people are used to here, and I expect we’d all agree there’s zero chance of staff being added to DOO networks. I’d agree guards make less sense on intensive metro operations (ironically OBS would make more sense somewhere like Merseyrail or SWR metro, that are retaining guards).
Where the second person remains, the choice is likely to be between an active and involved guard, a less skilled, less useful OBS (who costs about the same), or nobody at all else aboard. As a passenger I’d rather the first option.
Their job is to NOT just be sat in the back cab - that’s guard history coming through.
How can it be “the guard history coming through” when it has been pointed out above that the majority of OBS are no longer ex guards?
Whether or not it’s their job, a % of people will do as little as can be got away with. The fact of the matter is that OBS can get away with doing a lot less than guards can.
Ah so you are comparing OBS + DOO to guards doing the doors. That’s a different debate and I am never going to agree with that as I am on SWR where the ceremony of the doors takes AGES (not helped by Siemens tortoise doors)
I was correcting your completely false statement that guards on the Southern only rarely used their knowledge.
The premise of the OP, and my own experience, is that GTR OBS appear to be doing less, and are less engaged than many guards; do you have experience of using GTR OBS v guarded services to contradict that?
It’s also not necessarily true that guarded operation is necessarily slower than DOO - I work guarded trains now where the guard can get the doors open quicker than I could as a DOO driver…
I value a second person, I would prefer DOO was upgraded to DCO, but I want that second person patrolling the train and helping passengers, not hiding in a cab (or their office on SWR) nor restricted by having to do the doors job the driver can do.
In that case, you’d be better off with a guard. OBS aren’t involved in operation of the train, and are better able to hide in the back cab than guards are. They aren’t guaranteed to be on every train, and can also be entirely removed more easily…
It’s odd that, in a thread calling for the abolition of the OBS role based on them not doing enough, certain people
still try to argue that OBS is preferable to a guard from a passenger perspective (and the same people who can be seen on other threads calling for the railway to be defunded
).
Same question as above: are you seriously suggesting the DfT wanted GTR to downgrade the guard role because they thought it would improve things for passengers?
This nicely summarises my opinion as a passenger. The only thing I'd add is that I'd want to train to still run if the second person is not available.
The % of trains cancelled due to no guard (but still having a driver) is infinitesimal. In several years of guarded operation, I’ve had this happen less than half a dozen times.
As a passenger I’d rather take the risk of the occasional cancellation due to lack of a guard in exchange for having an additional safety critical, fully engaged member of staff aboard, rather than someone who is essentially another passenger, who hides in the back cab and occasionally plays around with the PA.
