Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[Tetchytyke]

Eeek! What system of dispatch are they using?!

In the tunnel stations, where the doors open on the offside, it is CCTV monitors mounted to the tunnel wall.

In the outdoor stations, it is a large platform mirror, regardless of which side the doors open.

There are a few stations where there are problems every autumn because the low sun dazzles the driver. One of the worst stations is Pelaw, where the doors open on the offside, and there's no way the driver can see the platform from their cab.

 

[BestWestern]

Platform mirrors. Some use cameras, but it's only a handful (maybe 5 out of 60 odd stations).

The first one they got a bollocking from the RAIB for. I can't find the report right now (I'll edit if I can find it). Basically drivers had been closing the doors and in a lot of cases weren't checking platforms after pushing the close door button (and I believe in some cases they weren't checking at all). They now have a system (FASSI) in the cab which reminds them to check the platform and signal amongst other things.

The majority of clips in that video would have easily been prevented had the driver checked the platform before applying power. It's not like the platforms were busy so people were near the platform edges because they could go nowhere else.

That is one hell of a culture problem, criminal negligence as company policy!? Yikes.

 

[NSEFAN]

Nexus and DB Regio blame the passengers, naturally.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exqBIx-V-_Y

That video reminds me of this sign. Must be something do with "Newcastle".

 

[theblackwatch]

Well virtually every figure you've supplied in that sentence is inaccurate to some extent, but Police Superintendents start on £64,830. :roll:

Can I remind people of the subject of this thread "DOO and related issues debate (in the context of Southern guards voting to strike)". It should not be used for discussing the salaries of Train Drivers and Coppers.

 

[Carlisle]

No you would still be entitled to your statutory minimum notice if you were being dismissed for misconduct (unless being dismissed for gross misconduct in which case dismissal can be instant) or were in redundancy situation. What it really means is that after the twelve months of the contract, unless the employer chooses to extend it, you'll be out of a job.

Ok it's not great job security , but the likes of Virgin for example have been recruiting quite a large number of staff in a very similar manner for decades already and the unions don't appear to have ever been particularly motivated in opposing it there

 

[Tetchytyke]

That is one hell of a culture problem, criminal negligence as company policy!?

DB Regio and Nexus' main response was to start prosecuting people who block the doors or board when the warning bell sounds, even though there is no visual warning that the doors are closing.

There is a culture problem, one that blames the passengers for the repeated unsafe despatches. Not that I disagree with going after the idiots who block the doors so their mates can catch the train, but still.

The CCTV monitors on the platforms are tiny and the feed is really quite poor. The mirrors are of variable sizes but have problems in low sunlight. The cabs on Metro are half-width, so the driver doesn't even have the choice of leaning out of the window to check platforms on the offside. None of this has changed, even after the stern telling off they got from RAIB.

 

[Dieseldriver]

I happen to agree with him that the amount of training is excessive but I appreciate that you won't agree so probably best left at that.

Unfortunately bus drivers aren't in as strong a negotiating position as train drivers.

The subject was bought up by 'not a driver' who presumably doesn't drive anything judging by his name?

Amount of training is excessive? Not one qualified train driver I have spoken to feels that way, in fact, the general consensus is the opposite. It is a massive amount of information to learn and retain in such a short amount of time, particularly for external candidates that have no railway knowledge at the start. I personally think that a longer period of training would go some way to reduce the incidents associated with Post Qualified drivers. There seems to be this strange view from people that don't drive trains that it is an easy job with a disproportionately long period of training. The truth is very much different to that although i understand it would probably be talking to a brick wall to explain when so many people get obsessed with what, in their lack of experience/knowledge, they see train drivers as unskilled and overpaid.
One small point on reducing the training for drivers, have yourself a read of the Cullen report published in the aftermath of Ladbroke Grove.

 

[physics34]

Amount of training is excessive? Not one qualified train driver I have spoken to feels that way, in fact, the general consensus is the opposite. It is a massive amount of information to learn and retain in such a short amount of time, particularly for external candidates that have no railway knowledge at the start. I personally think that a longer period of training would go some way to reduce the incidents associated with Post Qualified drivers. There seems to be this strange view from people that don't drive trains that it is an easy job with a disproportionately long period of training. The truth is very much different to that although i understand it would probably be talking to a brick wall to explain when so many people get obsessed with what, in their lack of experience/knowledge, they see train drivers as unskilled and overpaid.
One small point on reducing the training for drivers, have yourself a read of the Cullen report published in the aftermath of Ladbroke Grove.

Training could be more intense is suppose (theory, simulator, PTS, rules and faults) but in no way is it excessive.

It is hard to get through to people that actually driving the train itself is relatively simple but it is everything around the job that is difficult.........shift work, concentration, route learning, stress when things go wrong..)

If anyone tells my my job is easy i just reply that the job that they do is also easy and they get the hump.

 

[Deepgreen]

I now understand that RMT and ASLEF drivers are to be balloted for strike action over DOO. Meanwhile, parallel (I think) ballots are to take place over ticket office closures.

So, far from dying away, the possibility of full industrial action seems to be increasing steadily. It will be interesting to see what support is displayed for which topic.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

 

[FordFocus]

I think GTR are awaiting the results of the ballot from ASLEF before picking holes in the ballot as the font was the wrong style and running to the High Courts than actually solving the issue.

 

[Carlisle]

I think GTR are awaiting the results of the ballot from ASLEF before picking holes in the ballot as the font was the wrong style and running to the High Courts than actually solving the issue.

Is there much point in GTR negotiating meaningfully at the moment when (assuming a yes vote ) publicly anyway the union appears interested in little more than digging in alongside the RMT for what'll likely result in more prolonged and probably coordinated industrial action,

 

[Robertj21a]

I think GTR are awaiting the results of the ballot from ASLEF before picking holes in the ballot as the font was the wrong style and running to the High Courts than actually solving the issue.

Hopefully, any union will always ballot their members legally.

 

[Deepgreen]

Hopefully, any union will always ballot their members legally.

Ideally, but errors have been made in the past which have rendered ballots invalid (not just in the rail sphere), and care needs to be taken to avoid these.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Hopefully, any union will always ballot their members legally.

Ideally, but it's very complex. ASLEF's last ballot, to do with Gatwick Express, was declared unlawful because it included drivers at Redhill; ASLEF said they drove GatEx, GTR said only "in exceptional circumstances" (I'm sure I've heard that phrase before...), the court sided with GTR.

 

[Bantamzen]

I just don't get this obsession from TOCs / DfT with DOO. We have already seen cases against railway staff because people have been injured or killed during train dispatch procedures, so why in goodness do some people think removing one member of staff from the process worth it? I would have thought that drivers would have enough to worry about during an operational day without also having to worry about someone sprinting for the doors as they close, or leaning against their train as they pulled away?

If companies like Arriva are worried about making savings, then work harder on revenue protection. Across the Northern network there are huge gaps where those inclined can get away with fare evasion fairly easily, even with a increase in RPOs. If DOO becomes an issue for guards and drivers, and a dispute breaks out as a result I for one will support them regardless of the disruption it will cause me.

 

[47802]

I'm old enough to remember the 317's sat in sidings while the unions argued with BR over DOO operation. It seems kind of crazy that we are still having this argument over 30 years later. Given the length of time DOO trains have operated in this country if they were unacceptably unsafe then I think they would have come under greater scrutiny by now. If the unions have evidence to show that DOO operation is unacceptably unsafe then I think they need to present that evidence, if not then just get on with it, otherwise it looks little more than a job protection exercise for guards, which in my view is what it is and for which there really isn't much excuse.

 

[Chester1]

I'm old enough to remember the 317's sat in sidings while the unions argued with BR over DOO operation. It seems kind of crazy that we are still having this argument over 30 years later. Given the length of time DOO trains have operated in this country if they were unacceptably unsafe then I think they would have come under greater scrutiny by now. If the unions have evidence to show that DOO operation is unacceptably unsafe then I think they need to present that evidence, if not then just get on with it, otherwise it looks little more than a job protection exercise for guards, which in my view is what it is and for which there really isn't much excuse.

I agree. I was sympathetic when the Southern strikes started but then I found out that DOO has been used in UK for over 30 years. Its like black cab drivers attacking uber on safety, there is a little bit of truth, but mostly they are fighting for their job. I would prefer a system whereby TOCs had to have a second person onboard for 95% of journeys and be heavily fined for missing the target. It would provide some flexibility and resiliance but keep a second person onboard. New rolling stock and staff turnover looks like the best way for Northern to introduce DOO.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Let me just make clear Im against DOO, period!

That said, I can see the logic in what the DfT/railway management for turning some services over to DOO. Where the train length is only a couple of carriages on rural routes for example provided a ticket seller remains on board and issuing fares etc. On a 12 car commuter service absolutely not! You need full station despatch with staff on duty, not 12 6in sized tv monitors.

Where the difficulty lies is the routes we have on our railway and the trains that are run are so mixed and diverse that defining the different services becomes a bery distorted and grey area. So what constitutes toi long, at which point does a route become unsuitable for DOO, 2 cars, 4 cars? 10 cars? 2 platforms? 22 platforms? Theres no clear cut answer. To me that is tok far a grey area that cannot be reasonably defined for the nature of the network that we run. Many frontline staff and passengers have stated they do not want DOO, and the money "saved" is a moot point when revenue collection goes down and antisocial problems go up. Not to mention delays, toilet problems etc.....

Nah thanks. Id rather keep my job thanks!

 

[Astradyne]

Let me just make clear Im against DOO, period!

That said, I can see the logic in what the DfT/railway management for turning some services over to DOO. Where the train length is only a couple of carriages on rural routes for example provided a ticket seller remains on board and issuing fares etc. On a 12 car commuter service absolutely not! You need full station despatch with staff on duty, not 12 6in sized tv monitors.

Where the difficulty lies is the routes we have on our railway and the trains that are run are so mixed and diverse that defining the different services becomes a bery distorted and grey area. So what constitutes toi long, at which point does a route become unsuitable for DOO, 2 cars, 4 cars? 10 cars? 2 platforms? 22 platforms? Theres no clear cut answer. To me that is tok far a grey area that cannot be reasonably defined for the nature of the network that we run. Many frontline staff and passengers have stated they do not want DOO, and the money "saved" is a moot point when revenue collection goes down and antisocial problems go up. Not to mention delays, toilet problems etc.....

Nah thanks. Id rather keep my job thanks!

That last statement just reinforces the point the argument is about job security rather than any safety aspect

 

[northwichcat]

The RMT seem to refuse to accept DOO and DCO are different. So they presumably think that asking guards to not do door duties is the same as making them redundant!

 

[BestWestern]

That last statement just reinforces the point the argument is about job security rather than any safety aspect

Why shouldn't people fight for their jobs? I'm continually amused by the posters here who think it absolutely outrageous that staff, with the backing of a strong trade union, should dare to fight for their livelihoods. Presumably, these people would graciously pack their things and shake their employers' hands on their way out of the building if the same happened to them?

What we see is a sad indication of just how weak we have become as a society, which in turn is why we have widespread abuse of workers by mega-money corporations; such as zero hours contracts and p*ss poor pay and conditions. An example of this of course is GTR, who are lying through their teeth to pretend they are not looking to get rid of people, when that is in fact the sole purpose of the exercise. It is impossible to make these arguments without the anti-union brigade shouting Scargill, but it is in fact a very pertinent point.

Aside from this, there are safety arguments and that is why Aslef and it's membership are prepared to strike over it, as well as their legitimate concerns over the risk of Drivers being blamed for the inadequacies of DOO as a blanket policy going forwards.

 

[Dave1987]

That last statement just reinforces the point the argument is about job security rather than any safety aspect

Actually I regard the safety aspect even more pertinent. Some parts of their network are very very remote.

 

[47802]

That last statement just reinforces the point the argument is about job security rather than any safety aspect

To be fair the point about 12 car trains may have some validity but that's not a problem you are going to get on Northern

 

[Don King]

Of the incidents involving dispatch that have been investigated by the RAIB, here is a list of the method of dispatch involved.

DOO self dispatch CCTV

Huntingdon
Brentwood
West Wickham
Hayes & Harlington
Tooting (London Undergound)
Holborn (London Underground)
Warren Street (London Underground) - Doors open in traffic.

DOO self dispatch Mirror

Jarrow

DOO dispatch by platform staff

Kings Cross
Charing Cross
Liverpool Street - Doors open in traffic.

Guard self dispatch

Liverpool James Street
Newcastle Central

And for those of us who have access to SPAD briefings, the amount of SPADS in DOO land where the driver has claimed "distraction from passengers" is very large. Fortunately TPWS has usually put a stop to them.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It was written while the coalition government was in power and involved Rail North, with the councils that make up Rail North mainly being Labour.

And major northern Labour councils are opposed to DOO.

What about the new drivers? The existing drivers can't drive all the existing services as well as all the new services which will be introduced.

ASLEF is hardly going to agree for them to be on new contracts with DOO in it.

How is that inaccurate? The 319s have been modified to allow the guards to release the doors and Northern Rail never introduced DOO. Are you saying that because Alex Hynes said there were no plans for DOO when he was employed by Abellio/Serco that if DCO is introduced while he is employed by Arriva that he was lying?

No, it simply shows that even the managing director has no interest or desire for DOO, which shows just how unpopular and unworkable it is, even at executive level. This is simply another stupid ideological push from the clueless DFT.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A 'non-driving member of staff'. Brilliant. And they'll be Rules-trained safety critical, will they?

Ticket Examiner, RPI/RPO, catering staff, carriage cleaner, the bloke who orders the uniforms.....any of this lot are 'non-driving staff members'. None of them are able to act in the full manner in the event of an incident.

Most of them will likely have it drummed into them that driving cabs / back cabs are off limits and anyone caught in them will be dismissed no matter what reason, and the likelihood of them having appropriate training with the GSMR and refreshers is zero, let alone them being able to accurate describe where they are, and the line of route. And that assumes that GSMR has coverage, is working properly and the signaller knows exactly what the non safety critical member of staff is on about, and that there is no need to evacuate the train, nor resort to flags and detonators as it is too late / impossible to contact other trains.

 

[Andrew32]

I also get the argument that not all rolling stock would be ideal for DOO, however, accepting it on new rolling stock is opening the floodgates to future attacks as the ball has started rolling and new rolling stock can be ordered from savings made by reducing the wage bill opening up more routes to DOO/DCO.

The only thing that is different about this franchise is that DOO/DCO isn't in existence on any part of the ARN network, unlike Southern and Scotrail.

 

[northwichcat]

ASLEF is hardly going to agree for them to be on new contracts with DOO in it.

How can ASLEF prevent trainee drivers from having DOO included in their contracts? Are they going to encourage people to join the union before accepting a trainee role and tell them to refuse the contract if it mentions DOO?

No, it simply shows that even the managing director has no interest or desire for DOO, which shows just how unpopular and unworkable it is, even at executive level. This is simply another stupid ideological push from the clueless DFT.

The MD of a TOC which has no plans to introduce DOO is hardly going to say something that implies that DOO might be considered given the RMT would probably threaten industrial action if any hint of even considering DOO was made.

 

[Robertj21a]

Let me just make clear Im against DOO, period!

That said, I can see the logic in what the DfT/railway management for turning some services over to DOO. Where the train length is only a couple of carriages on rural routes for example provided a ticket seller remains on board and issuing fares etc. On a 12 car commuter service absolutely not! You need full station despatch with staff on duty, not 12 6in sized tv monitors.

Where the difficulty lies is the routes we have on our railway and the trains that are run are so mixed and diverse that defining the different services becomes a bery distorted and grey area. So what constitutes toi long, at which point does a route become unsuitable for DOO, 2 cars, 4 cars? 10 cars? 2 platforms? 22 platforms? Theres no clear cut answer. To me that is tok far a grey area that cannot be reasonably defined for the nature of the network that we run. Many frontline staff and passengers have stated they do not want DOO, and the money "saved" is a moot point when revenue collection goes down and antisocial problems go up. Not to mention delays, toilet problems etc.....

Nah thanks. Id rather keep my job thanks!

Am I getting confused - haven't the 12-car Thameslink trains been DOO for many years ?

 

[Tetchytyke]

The RMT seem to refuse to accept DOO and DCO are different.

They're not different. They're two cheeks of the same backside.

I know many are trying to present DCO as the system in use on the 220/221s, where the guard gives a signal to the driver who then presses the button, but it isn't. DCO is the Strathclyde system.

Actually I regard the safety aspect even more pertinent. Some parts of their network are very very remote.

And there have been several incidents on these remote bits that show just how valuable guards really are.

 

[6Gman]

I agree. I was sympathetic when the Southern strikes started but then I found out that DOO has been used in UK for over 30 years. Its like black cab drivers attacking uber on safety, there is a little bit of truth, but mostly they are fighting for their job. I would prefer a system whereby TOCs had to have a second person onboard for 95% of journeys and be heavily fined for missing the target. It would provide some flexibility and resiliance but keep a second person onboard. New rolling stock and staff turnover looks like the best way for Northern to introduce DOO.

And if you, or a family member, were involved in an accident or incident which incapacitated the driver, and turned to the guard for assistance ... but you were on one of the 5% ... ?

 

[NSEFAN]

They're not different. They're two cheeks of the same backside.

I know many are trying to present DCO as the system in use on the 220/221s, where the guard gives a signal to the driver who then presses the button, but it isn't. DCO is the Strathclyde system.

I always interpreted it to be as you described, which is driver controlled doors but guard dispatch, rather than the Strathclyde manning arrangement which is DOO-P (since there's only a ticket inspector, not a guard). The railway must have an official definition of what DCO actually is. If it's not even defined anywhere then how on Earth could the DfT ask for it to be rolled out? :roll: