In reality, pretty much anybody can use a defibrillator.
British Heart Foundation said:
https://www.bhf.org.uk/how-you-can-help/how-to-save-a-life/defibrillators/how-to-use-a-defibrillator
It tells you what you need to do when you open one.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Arriva Rail North DOO
- Thread starter Andrew32
- Start date
- Status
https://www.bhf.org.uk/how-you-can-help/how-to-save-a-life/defibrillators/how-to-use-a-defibrillator
It tells you what you need to do when you open one.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Jonfun
Established Member
If the RMT are still intend on prolonging the dispute up here I’d suggest producing a fairly compelling argument explaining why door closure Is such a red line for them whereas colleagues on Merseyrail, Greater Anglia and SWR are willing to be more flexible Their present stance simply compounds that age old image some have of northerners being rather more stubborn than others
The GA deal is a massive loss for the RMT, as it's basically agreeing DOO with a token couple of caveats to save face. The Merseyrail dispute as I understand it hasn't yet been agreed by the Guards, never mind the Drivers. SWR seems still to be up in the air at the moment.
Northern and Merseyrail are both the strongest for the RMT to win.
Yes and let's not forget here the Tory government that put forward rail privatisation was a weak divided one that was faced with actually a strong opposition. So they should have used their muscle more but for whatever reason Bob Crow didn't do that. They could have had a national strike over privatisation But didn't.
DaveB10780
Member
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2015
- Messages
- 210
Great shame there seems to be such a total and utter lack of concern for the (non) travelling public who are just ordinary working folk. It should not be about winners and losers but providing a service.
why would they do that? now they have a plethora of companies they can pick off one at a time.
I'm sure there were national strikes in the mid 90s but that might have strengthened calls to privitise the network.
Are you thinking of the long running national dispute between railtrack and the signallers ? , which took place around then.
Granada Reports just showed a guard attempting to sing a poorly written song outside Lime St station, with the public ignoring them. Then they showed an anti-Brexit campaign around the corner which everyone was crowding around. Either the RMT's singer was that bad or the public have more important issues to worry about.
The odd day or two. Nothing like the neverending omnishambles we have now.
The majority of people felt the railway needed more investment. Privatisation was the obsession of the Tory free market loonies.
if the railways hadnt been privatised there would have been little new investment. The treasury was up against public spending limits which were generally perceived wisdom then. Remember talk of PSBR? The billions the ROSCOS have spent would not have happened, and Network rails borrowing would not have happened.
We would have still been in the days when trains were ordered in tiny numbers. Getting treasury authorisation for HST's and Mk3 coaches, and ECML electrification was exceedingly difficult. And the lack of rail investment happened under Tory and Labour governments.
And much of the investment was at half cock. Hastings line electrification without enough juice for decent length trains, electrifying to Royston instead of going all the way to Cambridge.
Same as british gas, british Telecom, British Gas, the electricity industry. All in dire need of investment capital which the government didnt have. And the same reason they invented PFI.
I am sure many can criticise this in hindsight. but remember, it was different times then.
Is today strike day number 39?
I'm afraid I have to offer a different interpretation on events.
Look at the supposedly "botched" Hasings line electrification.
This came alongside many infill electrification schemes. Portsmouth - Southampton, Selsdon - East Grinstead.
Exactly how many Southern Region electrifications have we had since Tonbridge - Redhill 1995 ? (I was on the first electric passenger service on that route - the End of an Era railtour on EPB 5001).
Answer - squat all.
If we'd had our glorious privatisation during the 1980's, we'd still be debating whether we should get more 40 year old DMU's for Portsmouth-Southampton, or whether we should turn it into a guided busway/tramway.
Very few strikes collapse that quickly. This suggests in time past, strikes resulted in a better offer that was accepted by the Unions.
Leaving aside the merits of each side of the dispute -if the government weren't paying out compensation they would surely have settled for a fraction what the strike should be costing them.
Well indeed. This compensation that we taxpayers are paying to prolong the strikes must surely be a political issue !
Yes, I think it might well be.
I'mscratching my forehead to think of the last 39 day strike I experienced under BR (admittedly I was only using it from the mid 1980's onwards).
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,518
......but they wouldn't have settled any sooner if either party was determined to not back down.
Did even 1982 flexible rostering include 39 days of strikes? It has long been in both parties interests to resolve this, but bankrolled by government compensation there is almost nothing to sell to their members as an improved offer.
Generally there is movement and they meet in the middle. The Anglia deal looked like an each way fudge. But bankrolled by government compensation whatever the merits of the dispute itself one party isn't hurting and the other isn't quite hurting enough to capitulate.
Alas, it was a bit before my time, but your observation is extremely pertinent !
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,518
I'm well aware there's usually a movement and they end up near the middle. My point was that one party may have decided that, on this occasion, there is no need to move at all.
I would say that for any of the parties in this dispute, "not to feel the need to move at all" suggests a failure of the wsy the railway is specified/governed.
Yes, but would you feel confident to use one, in these litigious times, if you didn't have training?
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,518
Why ?
If we assume that Arriva/DfT want to achieve some real progress (rather than stay in the dark ages) then it isn't surprising that they might see little reason to change their position. They've always confirmed 'No redundancies' so, as we've said a million times, there's no real need to fear job losses anyway.
Elecman
Established Member
With modern Bi phasic defibs there is no need for training providing you can observe and do as the pictures show and do as your told, the clue is in the name Automatic Defibrillator. It won’t administer a shock unless it detects the correct conditions to need a shock, but will tell the operator to commence cand continue CPR
If there's nobody better trained or experienced to do so, and I'm on the phone to the 999 operator then yes... obviously. The alternative is near certain death for the person if one refuses to perform cpr and there is nobody else to help.
Dr Hoo
Established Member
Having checked some old copies of Modern Railways it looks as though the guards’ strike against DOO in Strathclyde in 1985 lasted for seven weeks continuously. It is not entirely clear whether the striking staff were actually dismissed although this was certainly threatened. Around 150 guards were involved.
Yes , A person could only bring a successful action against you if they can show the court that they are in a worse position than if you had not acted
In a case where use of an AED is required they would be dead if you had not acted . They would be incapable of bringing an action if you put them in a worse position than they already found themselves in .
Of course, that's the point of them.
I'm a guard, I have no first aid training. I did however use to work for the NHS where all staff have basic 'life saving' training and I've never been afraid of having a go if the situation really warrants it.
I've had a few nasty situations and never got into trouble for cracking on. What else can you do if you find someone in a pool of blood on an unmanned station begging you to help them?
I was around there in 1985 and Chris Green did indeed threaten to sack them - I'm sure a recruitment campaign (for OBS staff to replace any guard who didn't want to move to the new OBS role) was started. I think some of the industrial action was "wild cat" i.e. not official, as well.
Well, we had no such problems on Network SouthEast !
- Status