Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[highdyke]

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.

The ORR also agree it's safe, they are a government body. My gut feeling is whoever does a report, someone will cry foul.

The proof for me is however, it's not a new system of working, and has been in use for 30 years. I've used it and just don't agree with some of the claims by anti-DOO types. I'm no longer in that industry, so have no real interest whether it's implemented or not, at least financially or in terms of career. That doesn't mean I'm 100% right and there isn't another point of view, there's always an alternative point of view. Some people are not going to like it and I will never, ever convince them.

Nevertheless, I'd rather base things on evidence rather than taking the word of vested interests (be they management, the unions, certain grades). I will side with the RSSB and ORR, and my own experience, unless the antis can produce evidence to the contrary. That is rational and logical.

 

[speedy_sticks]

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

They are bloody useless to me as well!

I was at Deal station, no staff on platform and they didn't come out of the train to platform, it went without me, next one wasn't for an hour!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The ORR also agree it's safe, they are a government body. My gut feeling is whoever does a report, someone will cry foul.

The proof for me is however, it's not a new system of working, and has been in use for 30 years. I've used it and just don't agree with some of the claims by anti-DOO types. I'm no longer in that industry, so have no real interest whether it's implemented or not, at least financially or in terms of career. That doesn't mean I'm 100% right and there isn't another point of view, there's always an alternative point of view. Some people are not going to like it and I will never, ever convince them.

Nevertheless, I'd rather base things on evidence rather than taking the word of vested interests (be they management, the unions, certain grades). I will side with the RSSB and ORR, and my own experience, unless the antis can produce evidence to the contrary. That is rational and logical.

Well the factual evidence is it discriminates the disabled.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

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 ---


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.

Please do tell me how being able to be spontaneous on Southern network for 25 years and now being told I need to book up too 2 days in advance to travel on a train, progress!?

It's discriminationary and maybe soon to be found illegal.

 

[bnm]

It's discriminationary and maybe soon to be found illegal.

How soon? Fact or opinion?

Can you point me to the legislation that is proposed, or to any court cases where discrimination has been proved or alleged?

 

[highdyke]

They are bloody useless to me as well!

I was at Deal station, no staff on platform and they didn't come out of the train to platform, it went without me, next one wasn't for an hour!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Well the factual evidence is it discriminates the disabled.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Please do tell me how being able to be spontaneous on Southern network for 25 years and now being told I need to book up too 2 days in advance to travel on a train, progress!?

It's discriminationary and maybe soon to be found illegal.

Why do you keep highlighting what I am saying, and asking me questions when you know I agree with you?

 

[LowLevel]

Speaking as someone who opposes the role change extremely strongly...

On DOO trains there should perhaps be some kind of key switch that customer service staff can turn on to isolate the driver's door controls in some way or to some degree so they can get out of the train to provide assistance where required without fear of being left behind.

 

[313103]

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

I said that the eventual plan is to remove the Guard completely. And i will stand by that.

 

[Carlisle]

Speaking as someone who opposes the role change extremely strongly...

On DOO trains there should perhaps be some kind of key switch that customer service staff can turn on to isolate the driver's door controls in some way or to some degree so they can get out of the train to provide assistance where required without fear of being left behind.

The Javelins departing St Pancras seem to employ something vaguely similar to ensure the OBM is onboard

 

[highdyke]

I said that the eventual plan is to remove the Guard completely. And i will stand by that.

Well there's a plan to remove thousands of signallers, station staff, drivers on LUL, Glasgow underground, Rio Tinto freight and many metros around the world. This has been going on for up to 100 years to my knowledge, longer than probably any of us have been alive.

I'll stand by the railways will continue to change based on all the previous evidence. I don't see why this dispute is so special.

 

[Domh245]

Well there's a plan to remove thousands of signallers, station staff, drivers on LUL, Glasgow underground, Rio Tinto freight and many metros around the world. This has been going on for up to 100 years to my knowledge, longer than probably any of us have been alive.

I'll stand by the railways will continue to change based on all the previous evidence. I don't see why this dispute is so special.

You also talk about wanting a railway that is fit for purpose, and one that has staff on every train (where reasonable). You then say "Ah the railway is always changing and getting rid of staff and I'll support them doing that" - so which side do you actually support? Railway users and staff, or the accountants?

 

[highdyke]

You also talk about wanting a railway that is fit for purpose, and one that has staff on every train (where reasonable). You then say "Ah the railway is always changing and getting rid of staff and I'll support them doing that" - so which side do you actually support? Railway users and staff, or the accountants?

Realists and customers. The guards role is now mostly passenger orientated, that has been changing for at least the life of the railways.

 

[Harbornite]

Realists and customers. The guards role is now mostly passenger orientated, that has been changing for at least the life of the railways.

You cite the fact that many jobs have been lost over the years due to technological developments. That is a fair point because we no longer need firemen or secondmen on locos, nor do we need porters at stations and signalmen at small signalboxes when we have large PSBS and signalling centres. However, those roles weren't passenger facing roles (save for porters) and the loss of those professions didn't compromise the safety of the customers as they were redundant. I still think that keeping two staff members on passenger trains is a good idea and if you really want to retain a non-driving member of staff, why not let them perform the roles of revenue collection AND responsibility for the doors.

 

[Domh245]

Realists and customers. The guards role is now mostly passenger orientated, that has been changing for at least the life of the railways.

I find it hard to see how you can claim to support customers (I note your use of the word Customer instead of user or passenger! here) when you seem to be advocating turning a guard into something that just becomes a "nice to have". In times of economic trouble for a company, the first things to go are "nice to haves" so why do you think that when GTR either encounters economic trouble, or the next franchise comes in, that guards will still be there? I also fail to see how removing the safety critical aspect of them will improve their ability to assist passengers. As pointed out already, in this case the Doors are already driver opened, so there isn't any delays because the guard was finishing a ticket sale. Having the guard close the doors provides an extra level of safety over the driver, making it safer rather than just safe. Taking away the guards safety critical aspect means that when **** hits the fan, it's all up to one person (who could well be incapacitated) to deal with the hundreds of people on a train. Would you sell your car's spare tyre to make a quick few bucks and get a marginal increase in your cars' fuel efficiency, or would you keep it because you don't know when you might need it most.

 

[highdyke]

You cite the fact that many jobs have been lost over the years due to technological developments. That is a fair point because we no longer need firemen or secondmen on locos, nor do we need porters at stations and signalmen at small signalboxes when we have large PSBS and signalling centres. However, those roles weren't passenger facing roles (save for porters) and the loss of those professions didn't compromise the safety of the customers as they were redundant. I still think that keeping two staff members on passenger trains is a good idea and if you really want to retain a non-driving member of staff, why not let them perform the roles of revenue collection AND responsibility for the doors.

If the guard is operating the doors on a train with very frequent stops, all the fare evaders sit at the front. Why not have the guard as someone is who is more orientated to serving people, and is not delaying trains dashing back to the back cab and stopping fare evasion? They will pay for themselves in no time...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I find it hard to see how you can claim to support customers (I note your use of the word Customer instead of user or passenger! here) when you seem to be advocating turning a guard into something that just becomes a "nice to have". In times of economic trouble for a company, the first things to go are "nice to haves" so why do you think that when GTR either encounters economic trouble, or the next franchise comes in, that guards will still be there? I also fail to see how removing the safety critical aspect of them will improve their ability to assist passengers. As pointed out already, in this case the Doors are already driver opened, so there isn't any delays because the guard was finishing a ticket sale. Having the guard close the doors provides an extra level of safety over the driver, making it safer rather than just safe. Taking away the guards safety critical aspect means that when **** hits the fan, it's all up to one person (who could well be incapacitated) to deal with the hundreds of people on a train. Would you sell your car's spare tyre to make a quick few bucks and get a marginal increase in your cars' fuel efficiency, or would you keep it because you don't know when you might need it most.

What do you understand as safety critical? To me that means someone that can stop trains or help people in an emergency?

 

[BHXDMT]

If the guard is operating the doors on a train with very frequent stops, all the fare evaders sit at the front. Why not have the guard as someone is who is more orientated to serving people, and is not delaying trains dashing back to the back cab and stopping fare evasion? They will pay for themselves in no time...

I have a great solution to that problem - door control panels at *every* door. You'd never be more than a few metres from a panel and you could be out doing revenue at the same time. I work stock which has panels in the cabs & in every saloon, and I manage to take *lots* of revenue and do the doors without delaying the train.

TOCs could retrofit them (see Northern 319s), or specify that new stock comes with them (I believe Hitachi said they could install Guards panels on IEPs) - it can be done. Funny how most of the time they choose not to do it though to undermine our grade.

Also, we can't be in more than one place at one time... so even if we're not in control of the doors we still won't be able to get through 2/3/4 carriages worth of people to get the fare dodging scumbags at the front. Nothing will change, people will still get away with it (especially if they're doing short hops).

 

[speedy_sticks]

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 ---


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.

I have a great solution to that problem - door control panels at *every* door. You'd never be more than a few metres from a panel and you could be out doing revenue at the same time. I work stock which has panels in the cabs & in every saloon, and I manage to take *lots* of revenue and do the doors without delaying the train.

TOCs could retrofit them (see Northern 319s), or specify that new stock comes with them (I believe Hitachi said they could install Guards panels on IEPs) - it can be done. Funny how most of the time they choose not to do it though to undermine our grade.

Also, we can't be in more than one place at one time... so even if we're not in control of the doors we still won't be able to get through 2/3/4 carriages worth of people to get the fare dodging scumbags at the front. Nothing will change, people will still get away with it (especially if they're doing short hops).

Like all the Southern Bombardier Electrostars have!?

It works relatively well.

Under OBS, I will bet good money that the revenue will go down because they won't be on EVERY train.

Also, will OBS staff still be required to exit train to platform whilst the train leaves to issue penalty fares?

 

[highdyke]

I have a great solution to that problem - door control panels at *every* door. You'd never be more than a few metres from a panel and you could be out doing revenue at the same time. I work stock which has panels in the cabs & in every saloon, and I manage to take *lots* of revenue and do the doors without delaying the train.

TOCs could retrofit them (see Northern 319s), or specify that new stock comes with them (I believe Hitachi said they could install Guards panels on IEPs) - it can be done. Funny how most of the time they choose not to do it though to undermine our grade.

Also, we can't be in more than one place at one time... so even if we're not in control of the doors we still won't be able to get through 2/3/4 carriages worth of people to get the fare dodging scumbags at the front. Nothing will change, people will still get away with it (especially if they're doing short hops).

I have a better idea, give the door job to the driver, then when the guard gives right away against a red or someone is leaning against the train, and the guard move his head back inside with no control over the brake, nobody gets killed...It would save the cost of retrofitting units.

 

[Domh245]

What do you understand as safety critical? To me that means someone that can stop trains or help people in an emergency?

That's part of it. Safety critical (to me, with regards to on board staff at least) means being able to stop trains, help in emergencies, being able to secure the safety of the line, and being generally responsible for the train's safety. A non safety-critical RPI+ OBS won't be able to stop trains (as they won't have access to the cab to operate the "unbreakable" GSM-R red button) can only help so much in an emergency (as they won't have the route knowledge to know the nearest access points, line directions etc. I very much doubt that they would be PTS-ed either so they can't lead an evacuation properly). They wouldn't be able to guarantee Safety of Line again due to lack of route knowledge and lack of access to cabs.

 

[BHXDMT]

I have a better idea, give the door job to the driver, then when the guard gives right away against a red or someone is leaning against the train, and the guard move his head back inside with no control over the brake, nobody gets killed...It would save the cost of retrofitting units.

Riggghhtttt, because no DOO Driver has trapped and dragged a passenger or passed a signal at danger, not to mention the wrong side releases and stop shorts (of which I've prevented many door releases by telling the Driver to draw forward!).

Given RSSB are now suggesting retrofitting old units with DOO equipment, I'd wager retrofitting door panels is a darn sight cheaper.

Anyhow, I knew there was a reason I didn't post in this thread. I'm off to bed, up in the morning to collect more revenue and safely operate the doors!

 

[highdyke]

That's part of it. Safety critical (to me, with regards to on board staff at least) means being able to stop trains, help in emergencies, being able to secure the safety of the line, and being generally responsible for the train's safety. A non safety-critical RPI+ OBS won't be able to stop trains (as they won't have access to the cab to operate the "unbreakable" GSM-R red button) can only help so much in an emergency (as they won't have the route knowledge to know the nearest access points, line directions etc. I very much doubt that they would be PTS-ed either so they can't lead an evacuation properly). They wouldn't be able to guarantee Safety of Line again due to lack of route knowledge and lack of access to cabs.

The first duty of the driver or guard/obs is to contact the signaller, who can stop trains with signals or radio. Mobile phones and GSR-M radios (including portable devices) are provided. I don't rate my chances some fat guard or a woman in high heels running up the tracks with mini-explosives and flags, or putting TC clips down in axle counters or AB block sections thanks.

It's better if the on train staff are there to make announcements, help passengers etc. Once gold control is established or the emergency services are there, they take control of the situation anyway.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Riggghhtttt, because no DOO Driver has trapped and dragged a passenger or passed a signal at danger, not to mention the wrong side releases and stop shorts (of which I've prevented many door releases by telling the Driver to draw forward!).

Course they have, but so have there been incidents with guards. According to RSSB/ORR one is not more safer the the other, please provide stats to the contrary.

 

[313103]

If the guard is operating the doors on a train with very frequent stops, all the fare evaders sit at the front. Why not have the guard as someone is who is more orientated to serving people, and is not delaying trains dashing back to the back cab and stopping fare evasion? They will pay for themselves in no time..

I mentioned above my role as a guard on very similar rolling stock to southerns 377 (i think thats what they are) and there are door panels for a guard to operate in every single carriage (i even noticed them on the additional 5th car added to the trains i was taken off of). So there is no need for the guard to go to the back cab. Also i think you find all Southerns frequent stop services are already single manned, so its a freeloaders paradise anyway and they seat throughout the whole train. The services earmarked for DOO are fast trains in the majority with a couple of services that stop more frequently.

Isnt the Guard doing that, a recent journey to Folkstone had a a female Guard and whilst the train was waiting time at Folkstone Central the Guard come through the coach she was operating the door from, did a ticket check asked us where we were going and that it would be better to change at Ashford for a fast train. Thats the kind of Guard i like, did what i could do (we didnt do revenue) but did everything else. Therefore she had already paid for her salary.

This under the proposed new working, would be DOO operated, might of had a obs, might of had a ticket check, might of asked us are we ok. Alternatively we might not of had a obs, we might not of had a ticket check, we might not of been asked are we ok. If i was a betting man i would have an idea of which would be the favorite.

 

[highdyke]

This under the proposed new working, would be DOO operated, might of had a obs, might of had a ticket check, might of asked us are we ok. Alternatively we might not of had a obs, we might not of had a ticket check, we might not of been asked are we ok. If i was a betting man i would have an idea of which would be the favorite.

Depends if you work for Scotrail or SEastern I guess...I do see your point, but I'd still argue guards are better for revenue these days and helping people rather than lofty ideas about line protection with detonators.

 

[Domh245]

The first duty of the driver or guard/obs is to contact the signaller, who can stop trains with signals or radio. Mobile phones and GSR-M radios (including portable devices) are provided. I don't rate my chances some fat guard or a woman in high heels running up the tracks with mini-explosives and flags, or putting TC clips down in axle counters or AB block sections thanks.

It's better if the on train staff are there to make announcements, help passengers etc. Once gold control is established or the emergency services are there, they take control of the situation anyway.

I fear that you are confusing passenger hosts with guards. Most of the women I've seen as guards have tended to prefer boots to anything else (just like near enough every other member of operational staff who are PTS trained). I also find your mention of "fat guard" a bit interesting. Does a fat driver running down the track make you feel any more safe? It's lucky that guards have route knowledge and know when they are in AB sections or axle counter areas, so they know what type of protection to put down, isn't it! For that last paragraph, I ask you. What happens when the driver is incapacitated and the second member of staff is unavailable, either because they've been let go of to save on wages, or because their inbound service was late so the train went without them? Now there is no one making announcements, contacting emergency services, etc.

Course they have, but so have there been incidents with guards. According to RSSB/ORR one is not more safer the the other, please provide stats to the contrary.

Fortunately, incidents either way are unbelievably rare, so there isn't much in the way of statistics. I am also fairly sure that most TOCs don't release figures like this anyway (as well as a number of incidents that go unreported). Anyone with a modicum of common sense should be able to tell that having a guard dispatching a train with their wider field of vision is safer than a driver dispatching a train from some in-cab monitors. Similarly, they might be able to tell you that sticking your hand in a fire might burn you, and that putting your fingers in a doorway is probably going to hurt you. As I said earlier, it's the difference between safe and safer.

 

[highdyke]

Does a fat driver running down the track make you feel any more safe? It's lucky that guards have route knowledge and know when they are in AB sections or axle counter areas, so they know what type of protection to put down, isn't it!

They don't need to provide protection if they have contacted the signaller and he can protect the line with his standard tools of communication.

For that last paragraph, I ask you. What happens when the driver is incapacitated and the second member of staff is unavailable, either because they've been let go of to save on wages, or because their inbound service was late so the train went without them? Now there is no one making announcements, contacting emergency services, etc.

The DSD alarm sounds, and the signaller makes announcements and if necessary calls the emergency services. Of course both may be incapacitated, should we put someone in each carriage just in case? It's all about risk.

Fortunately, incidents either way are unbelievably rare, so there isn't much in the way of statistics. I am also fairly sure that most TOCs don't release figures like this anyway (as well as a number of incidents that go unreported).

So rare in fact, it's hardly worth spending millions on guards..

Anyone with a modicum of common sense should be able to tell that having a guard dispatching a train with their wider field of vision is safer than a driver dispatching a train from some in-cab monitors. Similarly, they might be able to tell you that sticking your hand in a fire might burn you, and that putting your fingers in a doorway is probably going to hurt you. As I said earlier, it's the difference between safe and safer.

What about risks from things like ding ding and away?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paisley_Gilmour_Street_rail_accident

Better still, all members of RMT/ASLEF should spend a few quid and commission a report to say it's less safe (if they can) and quantify what we are spending how many lives that is saving. If they figure is say £1 billion per life, are you willing to put that cash into other things on and off the railway if it saves more lives?

 

[speedy_sticks]

They don't need to provide protection if they have contacted the signaller and he can protect the line with his standard tools of communication.

The DSD alarm sounds, and the signaller makes announcements and if necessary calls the emergency services. Of course both may be incapacitated, should we put someone in each carriage just in case? It's all about risk.



So rare in fact, it's hardly worth spending millions on guards..



What about risks from things like ding ding and away?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paisley_Gilmour_Street_rail_accident

Not sure why your still defending DOO, even if proved safer, it still is discriminationary against disabled passangers, that should be enough to stop DOO extending.....

 

[Haig paxton]

I have a better idea, give the door job to the driver, then when the guard gives right away against a red or someone is leaning against the train, and the guard move his head back inside with no control over the brake, nobody gets killed...It would save the cost of retrofitting units.

The drivers don't want this responsibility either. You fail to grasp that too.

 

[speedy_sticks]

The drivers don't want this responsibility either. You fail to grasp that too.

I get a feeling that an awful lot of Southern Railway staff don't want DOO extention, platform staff, drivers, conductors etc.

 

[highdyke]

The drivers don't want this responsibility either. You fail to grasp that too.

Resign then. 400 people are applying for each job. Good job the signalling grade doesn't have the same attitude really, they have extra responsibility and have always taken on extra responsibility with ever larger areas etc.

 

[Haig paxton]

Resign then. 400 people are applying for each job.

Yes, let's pay them the living wage while we're at it. That's what TOC apologists like you would prefer.

 

[highdyke]

Yes, let's pay them the living wage while we're at it. That's what TOC apologists like you would prefer.

Pay who a living wage? £33k for an OBS? Worth more than a nurse, 5 years degree level training v a few months sub GSCE. Get real.

TOC apologist, better than being union dinosaur holding the country to ransom for selfish ideals.

 

[speedy_sticks]

Pay who a living wage? £33k for an OBS? Worth more than a nurse, 5 years degree level training v a few months sub GSCE. Get real.

TOC apologist, better than being union dinosaur holding the country to ransom for selfish ideals.

At least they care about equality, OBS will worsen it.