Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[Domh245]

I would like to see ... more jobs, not less

Oh yes, because as soon as the second person on board becomes non-compulsory, they're not going to be next on the chopping block in an attempt to save money.

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

Prove to me there is a safety issue with OBS and not a Guard, think about the bigger picture, prove there could be a way forward. Unless you do those things you will be open to these kinds of judgements.

You seriously think bald statistics tell the whole picture ? Do you know how many PTI incidents there are ? I do, because I'm a professional and research it.

Do you know the whole raft of DOO problems, real and potential that lie beneath the surface ? No, I do.

Do you know the very few things that are pluses over DOO than non DOO ?

I do, through having done the job, day in, day out, night in, night out.

You......................Don't
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Prove to me there is a safety issue with OBS and not a Guard, think about the bigger picture, prove there could be a way forward. Unless you do those things you will be open to these kinds of judgements.

No, you are the one with the big opinions, that know everything about everything YOU prove to us that your ideas are valid

 

[highdyke]

I'll talk about disability from a driver's point of view

The timetable can go hang itself if a wheelchair user, or someone infirm is slow getting on, if they need extra help, I'm out of my cab helping the guard with the ramp, or the pushing etc..

I've already talked about disability, you know I don't agree with one person on a train, and the union should be seeking guarantees.

Come on man, think. What in particular are you worried about I have disagreed with?

BTW, I'll agree with you to a certain point on the doors issue with longer trains. It would be interesting to know the RSSBs and ORR point of view, what's your view?

 

[Carlisle]

I would argue the unions are not fit for purpose. They should then be brought into binding arbitration on the matter, and the matter judged from an independent panel.
.

I recall a staff dispute with Quantas in Australia being settled in that manner but presumably we would need a change in UK law to apply it here

 

[speedy_sticks]

Question, if a train comes into a platform or station which isn't staffed what do you do then when you want to help the disabled person your caring for on to the train with their wheelchair?

Where is the OBS staff?

I've already talked about disability, you know I don't agree with one person on a train, and the union should be seeking guarantees.

Come on man, think. What in particular are you worried about I have disagreed with?

BTW, I'll agree with you to a certain point on the doors issue with longer trains. It would be interesting to know the RSSBs and ORR point of view, what's your view?

 

[highdyke]

Question, if a train comes into a platform or station which isn't staffed what do you do then?

Where is the OBS staff?

Hopefully looking out for people like the disabled to help on board, as well as other passengers with tickets and queries, etc. The driver is in control of the doors and safety of train, the signaller is in control of safety of the line. Both driver and OBS are equipped with GSM-R and mobiles to alert the signaller of any issues. On difficult or crowded stations dispatch staff are present.

 

[speedy_sticks]

Hopefully?

So instead of getting out at every stop it will be an utter lottery if they get out or not? That is, if there is even one on the train?

I still don't think you understand or care.

Hopefully looking out for people like the disabled to help on board, as well as other passengers with tickets and queries, etc. The driver is in control of the doors and safety of train, the signaller is in control of safety of the line. Both driver and OBS are equipped with GSM-R and mobiles to alert the signaller of any issues. On difficult or crowded stations dispatch staff are present.

 

[highdyke]

Hopefully?

So instead of getting out at every stop it will be an utter lottery if they get out or not? That is, if there is even one on the train?

I still don't think you understand or care.

No I do, which is why I said seek guarantees. Written ones that can be acted on. At the moment on some trains the guard rarely comes out of the back cab. Passengers should come first.

 

[313103]

I'm not going answer every comment, because the forums just turns into me droning on. I'm caring for a disabled person right now, that's one reason I think the OBS is a good idea, provided every train (within reason) has one on.

What is meant by the part (within reason)?

 

[highdyke]

What is meant by the part (within reason)?

Emergencies to get the service back on track like ECS.

 

[speedy_sticks]

No I do, which is why I said seek guarantees. Written ones that can be acted on. At the moment on some trains the guard rarely comes out of the back cab. Passengers should come first.

But at least you know where the guard was if if you needed them! I am sure that they get out between stops to check things.

Since you have admitted defeat with that question, here's another.

If your disabled person was got on by staff and then the train was in an accident, how would the OBS know that they were on the train to give them piroity attention and made sure that they were being cared for?

 

[313103]

Emergencies to get the service back on track like ECS.

The figures from Southern (someone did post it some 300 posts back), show that they currently have around 500 Guards, yet only require around 290 OBS staff once all the trains are in doo mode, that is a net lost of staff. So not all trains will have them.

What about when they are dispensed with by the company?

Because they are a bottom line cost to the company, who will bring no quality to the passenger.

 

[74A]

The figures from Southern (someone did post it some 300 posts back), show that they currently have around 500 Guards, yet only require around 290 OBS staff once all the trains are in doo mode, that is a net lost of staff. So not all trains will have them.

What about when they are dispensed with by the company?

Because they are a bottom line cost to the company, who will bring no quality to the passenger.

There will still be a couple of hundred guards when the current changes have happened. So still about 500 OB staff in total

 

[highdyke]

The figures from Southern (someone did post it some 300 posts back), show that they currently have around 500 Guards, yet only require around 290 OBS staff once all the trains are in doo mode, that is a net lost of staff. So not all trains will have them.

What about when they are dispensed with by the company?

Because they are a bottom line cost to the company, who will bring no quality to the passenger.

I agree with you, they shouldn't be dispensed with. I have never, ever, on any forum at any time said they should be. I just disagree with some people about line protection - mobiles, GSM-R and SPTs are much superior to someone running along the track with flags and dets. The doors issue, there may be an issue with longer trains. I would however, be willing to trust the judgement of the ORR and RSSB. I don't subscribe to tin foil hat conspiracy theories.

 

[Tomnick]

Emergencies to get the service back on track like ECS.

ECS trains, the vast majority at least, already can (and do) run DOO - a long established compromise.

 

[highdyke]

But at least you know where the guard was if if you needed them! I am sure that they get out between stops to check things.

Since you have admitted defeat with that question, here's another.

If your disabled person was got on by staff and then the train was in an accident, how would the OBS know that they were on the train to give them piroity attention and made sure that they were being cared for?

Look, I've had guards admit to me they never go out the back cab on certain trains, especially later at night. I dunno about you, I'm in the camp where they should be more visible and helping people rather than hiding away.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

ECS trains, the vast majority at least, already can (and do) run DOO - a long established compromise.

Indeed, the other thing I mentioned was specials where there is severe out of course working, instead of trains languishing in platforms and sidings. Flexibility is the key.

 

[speedy_sticks]

Last week I was stuck on a train at Three Bridges station due to a lack of communication from St Pancras International, nobody was on the platform or train to get me off.

The train left with me still on it to Heywards Heath. A passanger pressed the emergency alarm, the driver had to call the signal box to get them to tell Haywards Heathr that I was coming.

When I arrived the driver had to get out of his cab and walk up the long train to reset the alarm.

It was a Thameslink DOO train.

See any problems?

Look, I've had guards admit to me they never go out the back cab on certain trains, especially later at night. I dunno about you, I'm in the camp where they should be more visible and helping people rather than hiding away.

 

[313103]

There will still be a couple of hundred guards when the current changes have happened. So still about 500 OB staff in total

The eventual outcome in all of this is rid the guard completely, and that is the point i was trying to make.

 

[highdyke]

Last week I was stuck on a train at Three Bridges station due to a lack of communication from St Pancras International, nobody was on the platform or train to get me off.

The train left with me still on it to Heywards Heath. A passanger pressed the emergency alarm, the driver had to call the signal box to get them to tell Haywards Heathr that I was coming.

When I arrived the driver had to get out of his cab and walk up the long train to reset the alarm.

It was a Thameslink DOO train.

See any problems?

I think it depends on the line. Where you have an intensive metro style service, maybe the is more room for maneuver. On rural lines, say with only an hourly service, no way should there be no OBS on board. A personal preference if for an extra person to be on every train (except in emergencies) the compromise is the flexibility they can go everywhere.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The eventual outcome in all of this is rid the guard completely, and that is the point i was trying to make.

I hope not. There's very much a case for guards to prove their worth in revenue protection and passenger service.

 

[speedy_sticks]

I think it depends on the line. Where you have an intensive metro style service, maybe the is more room for maneuver. On rural lines, say with only an hourly service, no way should there be no OBS on board. A personal preference if for an extra person to be on every train (except in emergencies) the compromise is the flexibility they can go everywhere.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I hope not. There's very much a case for guards to prove their worth in revenue protection and passenger service.

If there was a guarantee that the OBS would get out at every unstaffed platform I would be much happier!

 

[highdyke]

If there was a guarantee that the OBS would get out at every unstaffed platform I would be much happier!

I'd support you in that all the way.

 

[speedy_sticks]

I think it depends on the line. Where you have an intensive metro style service, maybe the is more room for maneuver. On rural lines, say with only an hourly service, no way should there be no OBS on board. A personal preference if for an extra person to be on every train (except in emergencies) the compromise is the flexibility they can go everywhere.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I hope not. There's very much a case for guards to prove their worth in revenue protection and passenger service.

Please don't be deliberately silly, we all know it's all down to DfT wanting to save money and nothing else.

They obviously haven't carried out a cost vs benefit analysis of the guards roll.

 

[Tomnick]

Indeed, the other thing I mentioned was specials where there is severe out of course working, instead of trains languishing in platforms and sidings. Flexibility is the key.

The trouble with that approach is how ambiguous "severe" can be! It's one thing if there's proper spare cover on a regular basis, no uncovered turns and a responsible approach to staffing - but what then stops the TOC leaving vacancies unfilled, eroding spare cover so that trains are running without a second member of staff on a regular basis, any sort of "disruption" or even just annual leave, staff shortages etc. leaving trains run single-manned. Maintaining the absolute requirement for a guard seems to be the best incentive to me, and accepting that there'll be a handful of occasions, when it's really gone up the wall, when a train has to run ECS because no guard is available (no need for them to languish in platforms and sidings if there's a driver available to run it ECS to a location at which a guard is available).

 

[Sadsmileyface]

Shouldn't that report simply say 'Study finds DOO is safer than Driver Guard operation according to study made by people who stand to benefit financially from removing the Guard from the train'?

The RSSB reminds me in some ways of those Tobacco "research" companies. They say that removing the Guard would remove the risk of miscommunication. But even if that were the case at least the driver would be able to have a chance to spot the error from the Guard. With the driver on his own, any mistake is final.

It's utter nonsense that TOC's are able to dictate these findings, allegations of bias thrown around by that famously independent organisation that does not benefit in any way whatsoever, the RMT.

This is like saying that I cant get arrested because my taxes pay for police.

 

[313103]

Look, I've had guards admit to me they never go out the back cab on certain trains, especially later at night. I dunno about you, I'm in the camp where they should be more visible and helping people rather than hiding away.

When they trains changed on London Overground from 313 units to 378 units you could always find me in the train, unless it was extremely busy where my presence meant some passengers couldn't board, then and only would i be in the back cab. That was until July 2013 when the company announced DOO was coming in, i then decided i would spend most of the time in the back cab, as i knew the company didnt want my presence on the train full stop.

So i was more visible and helping people, still didnt keep me in a job though!

I chose to take redundancy package, because if me and about 70 others didnt the company would of made redunancys which would of been on a last in first out basis.

Hence the reason why i think the obs role is only a short term fix to try and appease the staff now, they know and i know that they will eventually disappear and i will put my life on that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I hope not. There's very much a case for guards to prove their worth in revenue protection and passenger service.

As mentioned above it didnt keep me as a guard.

 

[BHXDMT]

I hope not. There's very much a case for guards to prove their worth in revenue protection and passenger service.

I do, every day. Apparently that's not good enough.

 

[highdyke]

The trouble with that approach is how ambiguous "severe" can be! It's one thing if there's proper spare cover on a regular basis, no uncovered turns and a responsible approach to staffing - but what then stops the TOC leaving vacancies unfilled, eroding spare cover so that trains are running without a second member of staff on a regular basis, any sort of "disruption" or even just annual leave, staff shortages etc. leaving trains run single-manned. Maintaining the absolute requirement for a guard seems to be the best incentive to me, and accepting that there'll be a handful of occasions, when it's really gone up the wall, when a train has to run ECS because no guard is available (no need for them to languish in platforms and sidings if there's a driver available to run it ECS to a location at which a guard is available).

Again this is what needs discussing, things need putting in writing. There will always be the the "Emergency" occasion in the rule book, it doesn't mean it has to be unsafe if properly managed.

My own view is the Guard's role needs redefining as technology has changed. This has happened in the signalling grade for decades.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Please don't be deliberately silly, we all know it's all down to DfT wanting to save money and nothing else.

They obviously haven't carried out a cost vs benefit analysis of the guards roll.

I think it's genuinely silly not changing roles as technology moves on. Any business that seeks to hold back the tide of change is doomed, with the odd niche exception.

My views come from being made redundant twice as a signaller, having to watch as his role is continuously changed, ending in leaving the role years back as there was no long-term future, except if you want to live in certain places. It's no problem if you plan for it and take action personally. Some people prefer the railway of old, I get that. In the end it's simply a transport system that has to provide a use to society.

Huge fan of radio, having stopped two cashes, rather than using just fixed signals, and a massive fan of the flexibility when things go wrong, it creates less problems for all.

I have witnessed many guards never coming out the back cab, watch others struggle to do doors and revenue, I've been told by several guards they will not come out the back cab when certain things happen or at certain times of the day.

For me, most of the dispute centres around the RMT making sure trains cannot run at without guards, partly to protect members, partly for power.

I would much prefer the unions to be non-political and professional bodies - rather like BALPA. I want the railway to be a successful part of the 21st century, trusted by politicians, planners and the public to deliver. That's the only motivation.

 

[Carlisle]

The eventual outcome in all of this is rid the guard completely, and that is the point i was trying to make.

Ive not heard of any plans, proposals or even slightly believable rhumouours to remove any Javelin OBMs or Scotrail TTIs

 

[plymothian]

The safety of the train is already the driver's responsibility - not the guard's.

Guards got sold out on this years ago, and the role is rapidly becoming obsolete since.

The safety of passengers on the other hand... but that is not enough any more apparently to justify the guards' role.

 

[FordFocus]

It was mentioned a few pages back (I think by HH) there is a clear conflict of interest between the RSSB and GTR.

Charles Horton, the CEO of Govia Thameslink says DOO is perfectly safe as the "independent report" says it is and posts it as a press release on the Southern website.

RSSB who wrote the "independent report" says DOO is a safe method of working. The report was signed off by the directors of the RSSB which includes Charles Horton of Govia Thameslink.