So why is opening and closing the doors (and the if that's in the rule book why does it not happen everywhere) make passengers more safe than say being trained in emergency aid. the rule book can be changed.. that's what this is all about - the claim by the RMT is that by not opening and closing the doors its less safe for passengers.
Thats the root of the argument. Yet they are not fighting for the rule book to be changed to make the 2nd person on board trained in emergency aid.
My job relies on following changing legislation - I adapt and have to use the new rules in my job.
"Opening and closing the doors" is not the "root" of the argument at all, but it is part of it.
The main reason for the dispute is Northern want to start running trains with no second person aboard who will be PTS trained / safety critical. Yes I'm aware of the recent statements from TfN etc, but nothing has been guaranteed yet by anyone, least of all Northern.
Another reason that a second PTS trained / safety critical member of staff needs to remain on every train is to look after the passengers should the driver become incapacitated / traumatised either through injury /suicide etc. There have been quite a few incidents that fall into this category over the last few years, the guard is there in these situations to take control, prevent such things as passengers letting themselves off the train, summon assistance and let the passengers know what is going on.
Also, should this DOO nonsense be pushed through and trains start to run without another person on board, (theres no guarantee of this yet, regardless of the latest fluffy press releases), who helps elderly / disabled passengers on and off the trains? Who is there on the trains that people can go to should there be a problem?
I totally agree with the reasons behind this dispute and hope that Northern / TfN and the RMT can at some point thrash out an agreement that keeps a second safety critical person on EVERY train.