W Driver Only Operated Trains (DOO) discussion

[D1009]

DOO will slowly happen everywhere across the UK rail network. Any new train order will see trains fitted with exterior CCTV cameras to enable DOO operation.

The DfT wants to cut railway running costs and this is how they will achieve it.

Do I take it then that on a 10 car IEP the driver will have to monitor 20 doors simultaneously using the exterior CCTV? Is this done anywhere already?

 

[paul1609]

Do I take it then that on a 10 car IEP the driver will have to monitor 20 doors simultaneously using the exterior CCTV? Is this done anywhere already?

12 car Javelins on HS1

 

[ANorthernGuard]

I too am in favour of the driver releasing doors, especially as it is quicker and easier for the driver to see they have stopped short (in any event that they happen to), and also generally a bit faster. However, there's still some stock on the network where SDO requires a guard/conductor to release the doors (eg. 171s) and I can't see that going away in the immediate future. I strongly agree that guards should dispatch trains wherever possible, perhaps barring stations where dispatchers can be provided as needed and the trains operate under ATO, as I understand there are some technologies where adding a guard to this would not necessarily be practical.

Thats only good when you have certain types of unit. What about in Northern land when we have more types of units then anyone else?

 

[theageofthetra]

12 car 465's on Southeastern.

 

[ainsworth74]

The full text of the letter appears to have been made available online:

2 April 2015

Dear colleague,

Over recent months there has been a great deal of speculation about the potential impact that the introduction of Super Express Trains (SETS) may have on colleagues currently working on board High Speed Trains.

As part of a confidentiality agreement with the Department for Transport during the franchise bidding process, we were unable to talk in detail about our plans. This has unfortunately meant that we have not been able to give colleagues reassurance about their future until now.

As you know, the introduction of SETS offers us a once in a lifetime opportunity to transform the service we give our customers. Of course, we need to operate the railway safely, but to be a real success we must provide frequent, fast and punctual services with the highest levels of customer service. We will need to make some real changes to make this happen, but it will take all of us to deliver our vision for the service we must give our customers.

For colleagues currently working on HSTs, there are two key changes proposed in our plans. The ability of the SET’s centralised systems to significantly reduce the safety risks posed by slam-door stock, alongside the shorter dwell times that provide key journey time improvements for customers, means we believe that the driver should be in sole charge of doors on these trains.

We will also be offering hot and cold food and drink to standard class customers at their seats – moving from the current buffet provision to a trolley. This follows in-service trials last year, which showed the vast majority of our customers felt a standard class trolley improved their journey with us. In the same trial, more than half of those who bought from the trolley said they wouldn’t have left their seat to buy something from the buffet.

I recognise these will be real changes for some colleagues, and I am determined to dispel any concerns about job security from the very beginning.

• We need more, not fewer, on board staff to make our plans work. We will be recruiting at least 100 more customer-facing staff on high speed trains, and there will be no compulsory redundancies as a result.

• Current Train Managers and Customer Hosts will retain their current terms and conditions when SETS are introduced.

• There will be more staff on more trains than today, and we will diagram a Train Manager to every SET in passenger service – including those currently worked by Turbo trains in DOO mode which convert to SET operation.

• We will provide food and drink served by a member of staff on board every high speed SET passenger service with a journey time of more than an hour.

• For those who simply don’t want to work on an SET, we will provide appropriate development opportunities to help colleagues apply for other roles if they wish.

These commitments are conditional on the following arrangements for operating SET:

• The Driver will be solely responsible for the operation of the doors on SET trains.

• Although not the normal method of operation, SET services could be operated with the Driver as the only member of staff on board when a Train Manager is not immediately available.

Additionally, if there is no industrial action taken as a result of SET introduction then we will be able to offer a voluntary redundancy package to Train Managers who wish to leave the business as a result of the introduction of the new trains and new methods of working. This would apply even if there are vacancies available that they could apply for.

Our proposals will create many new jobs across our business, and protect the jobs and reward packages of the vast majority of our staff. These are significant changes, but it is a change that is motivated by a desire to improve the safety and performance of our network and the service to our customers.

I know there will be many questions, but if you need to know more please speak to your line manager, or come along to one of the senior manager and director drop in sessions over the coming weeks and we will be happy to talk to you.

Yours sincerely

Ben Rule
Operations Director

https://exiledmackem.wordpress.com/...yourselves-for-a-massive-battle-to-save-jobs/

(Thanks to bnm for finding it)

If anyone wishes to discuss the catering element of this letter please do so on this thread.

One positive appears to be that some services which are truly DOO at the moment will gain a second member of staff when SETs are introduced and displace some Turbos.

 

[Rich McLean]

The full text of the letter appears to have been made available online:



https://exiledmackem.wordpress.com/...yourselves-for-a-massive-battle-to-save-jobs/

(Thanks to bnm for finding it)

If anyone wishes to discuss the catering element of this letter please do so on this thread.

One positive appears to be that some services which are truly DOO at the moment will gain a second member of staff when SETs are introduced and displace some Turbos.

The question, which I think is the most important here, is will Management hire more TMs as of now to cover those leaving, or will they be phased out, and On Board Managers (on less pay and different Terms and Conditions) recruited instead?

One to be asked at the next drop in session. I hope there is written reassurance that TMs on their current grades of pay and T & Cs are still employed and not just simply phased out altogether

 

[ChiefPlanner]

At one time there was a half-hearted proposal that the guard on the 312-operated trains to London should be someone (member of the public) on their way to work. This would avoid the need for FGE to actually employ guards as the units only did a peak-flow service to London.

I think the idea was soon withdrawn.

Soon dismissed for obvious reasons of safety compliance etc....(bit like drive your own bus to work and park it ...)

 

[D1009]

12 car 465's on Southeastern.

Do they have train mounted CCTV?

 

[lemonic]

I can completely see why current FGW train managers are not happy at the changes. No-one wants to see a reduction in their job security as well as the risk of a pay reduction in the future.

However, from a business point of view it is completely logical to save costs by using DOO and enable more efficient customer service and revenue protection at the same time. I think it is essential for each intercity train to have an On Board Manager, but they will not need to have safety critical responsibilities with the new trains.

Companies and industries need to innovate or they will die. The railway has always been traditionally slow to innovate, because of a lack of competition, since facilitating effective competition in the railways is difficult and may not be in the customer's interests. However, at some point the government will decide to stop investing so much in the railway and the railway will need to make serious cost savings. Ultimately, it is better that these are done in a rational way rather than in a desperate way to the detriment of the passenger.

And for the avoidance of doubt, if there was to be a sneaky plan to phase out train managers from some services to save costs, I am totally against that and do not believe that is in the railway's or the customer's interests.

 

[WatcherZero]

As for this carefully worded DOO letter, TM's will be done away with in the near future and the drivers will be doing it all.

While DOO is safe, crew working is safer!

What including cooking and trolley services

 

[Robertj21a]

I can completely see why current FGW train managers are not happy at the changes. No-one wants to see a reduction in their job security as well as the risk of a pay reduction in the future.

However, from a business point of view it is completely logical to save costs by using DOO and enable more efficient customer service and revenue protection at the same time. I think it is essential for each intercity train to have an On Board Manager, but they will not need to have safety critical responsibilities with the new trains.

Companies and industries need to innovate or they will die. The railway has always been traditionally slow to innovate, because of a lack of competition, since facilitating effective competition in the railways is difficult and may not be in the customer's interests. However, at some point the government will decide to stop investing so much in the railway and the railway will need to make serious cost savings. Ultimately, it is better that these are done in a rational way rather than in a desperate way to the detriment of the passenger.

And for the avoidance of doubt, if there was to be a sneaky plan to phase out train managers from some services to save costs, I am totally against that and do not believe that is in the railway's or the customer's interests.

Nice to see such sensible comments. Thank you.

 

[Bald Rick]

Do they have train mounted CCTV?

No they don't. But 12 car 377s and 12 car 379s do.

Also IIRC most (every?) LU train has DOO monitors in the driver's cab.

 

[Bishopstone]

Nice to see such sensible comments. Thank you.

Seconded. A well balanced contribution.

 

[PermitToTravel]

No they don't. But 12 car 377s and 12 car 379s do.

Also IIRC most (every?) LU train has DOO monitors in the driver's cab.

Not quite every train yet, but getting there - the District line is currently in the process of transitioning from platform mounted monitors to in-cab, which will leave just the Bakerloo and Piccadilly lines.

 

[D1009]

Thanks, the point I was trying to get at is, does the on board CCTV provide better information to drivers than the previous mirrors and screens on the platforms, and is this therefore the future of train operation? I am in total agreement with Lemonic's comments above, BTW.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thanks, the point I was trying to get at is, does the on board CCTV provide better information to drivers than the previous mirrors and screens on the platforms, and is this therefore the future of train operation? I am in total agreement with Lemonic's comments above, BTW.

In many cases there will be platform staff assisting, though?

But yes I'd say CCTV would provide better views of the individual doors. You can potentially have a screen containing an individual view of each coach at the same time in a big collage rather than just being able to see the length of the train using a mirror.

 

[Bald Rick]

Thanks, the point I was trying to get at is, does the on board CCTV provide better information to drivers than the previous mirrors and screens on the platforms, and is this therefore the future of train operation? I am in total agreement with Lemonic's comments above, BTW.

I would be surprised if any future new train procured for service in this country is specified without on board cameras / cab monitors suitable for DOO. On train kit is much cheaper than station kit, and easier to look after / less likely to be vandalised etc.

 

[PermitToTravel]

It would also permit, as happens on the Underground, a driver to watch the whole train out of a platform, rather than not being able to see the doors anymore after passing the external monitor. Unfortunately NR trains are not set up to allow this, for whatever reason.

 

[Clarence Yard]

On train monitors is fast becoming the new norm as NR is not keen on renewing the platform kit. On GW the SET sets, 365, 387 and all 165/6 sets will be fitted so you can see where this is all heading.

If I was the RMT, I would be majoring on the on train customer service angle to preserve job numbers and also on enhanced platform/car park presence for selling tickets/assistance as booking offices go out of fashion. They need to get ahead of the coming changes rather than being behind it otherwise they are in real danger of losing out.

Drivers got DOO payments for opening and shutting doors. What about something for the on board staff on DOO services. Better commission rates as a starter? What else could the RMT push for?

 

[bunnahabhain]

Lets say a driver goes all Germanwings and raises the EBS, isolates TPWS, AWS, DSD, etc. Who would notice it running unusually/erratically and be in a position to try to stop the train if they couldn't contact the driver? Oh, that's right, the guard.

 

[yorkie]

This is rather hypothetical, but the signallers could potentially cut the power.

Anyway you're still far safer on DOO trains like Southeastern High Speed, Scotrail's Strathclyde electrics etc, than on the road network.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Indeed - I feel like safety on the railways is now at the stage where any money spent writing new safety cases would save an order of magnitude more lives if spent on motoring prosecutions.

 

[D1009]

Lets say a driver goes all Germanwings and raises the EBS, isolates TPWS, AWS, DSD, etc. Who would notice it running unusually/erratically and be in a position to try to stop the train if they couldn't contact the driver? Oh, that's right, the guard.

Yes, DOO has been about on the rail network for decades, and nothing like that has happened, isn't it time to get on with it? I regard the Germanwings tragedy as akin to the Moorgate disaster when even the Undergound had guards.

 

[bunnahabhain]

This is rather hypothetical, but the signallers could potentially cut the power.

Anyway you're still far safer on DOO trains like Southeastern High Speed, Scotrail's Strathclyde electrics etc, than on the road network.

It is hypothetical but the majority of the safety role is hypothetical. How do you cut the power to a diesel train, not everything is or will be electric.

Would you be safer on those services if they had a guard? In the hypothetical situation of a breeze block through the window I'd say you would be, because you'd at least have somebody able to protect the train rather than just issue a ticket or tell you you're going to miss your connection.

 

[Clip]

It is hypothetical but the majority of the safety role is hypothetical. How do you cut the power to a diesel train, not everything is or will be electric.

Would you be safer on those services if they had a guard? In the hypothetical situation of a breeze block through the window I'd say you would be, because you'd at least have somebody able to protect the train rather than just issue a ticket or tell you you're going to miss your connection.

You do know modern signalling is built to fail yes? And in my limited knowledge that also includes if a train just stops for no apparent reason but someone else with more knowledge will be along to tell you how it does it as I will get all the terminology wrong and have the pedants at me for weeks without answering your question

 

[bunnahabhain]

You do know modern signalling is built to fail yes? And in my limited knowledge that also includes if a train just stops for no apparent reason but someone else with more knowledge will be along to tell you how it does it as I will get all the terminology wrong and have the pedants at me for weeks without answering your question

I'm well versed in signalling thanks.

You do know how assistance and emergency protection works yes? In my extensive knowledge I do and I know in those situations if your driver is crushed to 3" at the front and the axle counters have not detected a break in the rail (oh...they can't!) then the only person standing between you and another train is the guard, on a route with long block sections where it could be minutes between blocks then it might take quite a while for the bobby to notice a train stopped out of course.

 

[Starmill]

More single-manned trains is nonsense. Bit the safety debate is also mostly irrelevant. The crux of the matter is that even commuter trains amd certainly medium-distance commuter regional absolutely should have a second member of staff onboard to sell tickets and grip them, and offering customer service. Does it matter who controls the doors? So long as that is done safely, no. But London - Oxford/Banbury/Colchester and things like that are very silly as Driver only onboard. Just what sort of Railway are we trying to make for ourselvels?

 

[Clip]

Yes I am well aware of how protection works thanks but given the amount of DOO that is around and how long it has now been on our railway for there really isn't any need for your hypothetical question about it.

 

[bunnahabhain]

Just what sort of Railway are we trying to make for ourselvels?

One that earns money for the shareholders and packs in as many passengers as possible paying unsubsidised fares.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes I am well aware of how protection works thanks but given the amount of DOO that is around and how long it has now been on our railway for there really isn't any need for your hypothetical question about it.

So you support full DOO of the network?

 

[Flamingo]

So a lot of people think it is safer for a driver looking at a screen to open and close the doors remotely, than have a member of staff who's job is walking up and down the train, visibly inspecting and alert for problems? Not to mention dealing with passengers in any on- board emergency, or when the driver is incapicated.

Not every safety incident results in a fatality. What are the real figures for near-misses in DOO land, I wonder.

The Guard does a lot more than checking tickets and kicking people out of First Class. That's what they do when there is nothing more important (for more important, read anything else) going on. I really thought that the forum members on this site would have grasped that by now, but a significant number seem to still be getting the role of the Train Guard and the role of an Assistant Ticket Examiner mixed up. Some of those confused about the different responsibilities attached to each role appear to be rail staff.