Guard / Conductor / Train Manager terminology

[snail]

Split from http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=916683

The guards stand on the platform in order to open and close the doors safely. Not to collect revenue.

I thought the person opening and closing doors was a conductor or train manager? Many regular passengers would not know the difference between a 'train guard' and an RPI. They wear similar uniforms and carry similar equipment.

We need to give inexperienced posters a break sometimes when they use incorrect terminology that regulars often misuse!

 

[island]

No. The person doing the doors is a guard. Some companies call them a train manager, but the task is the same. Some guards also sell and check tickets.

A conductor, or ticket examiner, sells tickets only and does not have door duties, and stays on a train from start to finish.

An RPI checks tickets only and may sell them on limited occasions (e.g. from stations with limited or no ticketing facilities). He will generally not stay on one train from start to finish, getting off once he has finished (or perhaps be assigned to the gateline at a station). In penalty fares areas he will also be an authorized collector.

 

[Brucey]

No. The person doing the doors is a guard. Some companies call them a train manager, but the task is the same. Some guards also sell and check tickets.

A conductor, or ticket examiner, sells tickets only and does not have door duties, and stays on a train from start to finish.

I have always believed the words guard, conductor and train manager can be used interchangeably (indeed British Rail used to call train managers Senior Conductor). Conductor is not the correct word for a ticket examiner.

 

[snail]

No. The person doing the doors is a guard. Some companies call them a train manager, but the task is the same. Some guards also sell and check tickets.

The TPE personnel at Preston have badges saying 'Conductor'. And we wonder why people get terminology confused...

 

[tony_mac]

although, in this case, I think 'guard' possibly just means 'a person in uniform'

 

[spacehopper]

No mention of a "train manager" or "conductor" in the rule book. TOCs can call us what they want but we are employed to carry out the role of the "guard".

Joe public don't know the in and out of our competency and training all they see is the "ticket man". Look at the "big man" incident in the articles published you will see references to the "conductor", "ticket conductor", "ticket inspector", "ticket examiner" and guard!

Conductor and Senior Conductor came about from Traincrew Concept of the 80's, when DOO came in and BR did away with the "guard" grade and we became conductors or train(wo)men etc. During this time when guards started to undertake more revenue and customer contact duties they gave us a less operational job title.

I much prefer being a guard to a conductor- sounds too much of an americanism and has "bus" connotations. We don't call drivers engineers- yet!

If you saw a block on with someone wearing a name badge that says "conductor" only explanation would be either staff wearing a wrongly issued name badge or the TOC was using a little used clause in CRI that allows them to use "on train safety critical" graded staff to carry out "other station duties". Even then they most certainly wouldn't be doing revenue stings and reports for prosecution- at the most all I would be doing is selling tickets from my Avantix to those who required them.

 

[142094]

I have always believed the words guard, conductor and train manager can be used interchangeably (indeed British Rail used to call train managers Senior Conductor). Conductor is not the correct word for a ticket examiner.

Same here, although there should be a distinction between someone who has safety critical roles such as door closing along with revenue (what I would normally call a guard or conductor). RPIs, inspectors or 'revenue staff' should mean those who just check tickets.

 

[BestWestern]

No. The person doing the doors is a guard. Some companies call them a train manager, but the task is the same. Some guards also sell and check tickets.

A conductor, or ticket examiner, sells tickets only and does not have door duties, and stays on a train from start to finish.

So many different terms, so much needless confusion! A Conductor has the same job as a Train Manager or Guard, and is different from a Ticket Examiner. Indeed, First Gt Western use the term Conductor for the Guards on their DMU operated services (former Wessex Trains and Thames Trains services) and Train Manager on their HST operated High Speed services. All have the same job, the only difference is the trains they operate. Other TOC's, such as South West Trains, use simply Guard. I prefer Guard and agree with a previous poster that Conductor sounds like an inferior role, although really it's all rather academic.

As you rightly state, some Guards have no revenue duties, though this is rather rare as it tends to represent poor value for money for their employer. SWT use the term 'Commercial Guard' for the vast majority of their 'doors and tickets' Guards, and then have simply 'Guard' for the London suburban services where the role does not involve revenue. Further complication comes from TOC's like CrossCountry where the Drivers on their Voyager trains release the doors on arrival at a station, and the Train Manager then has to send them a buzzer code to instruct them to close the doors again upon departure; a very complicated and really rather silly system :roll: And then, to top it all off, we have the glorious DOO operations where the Driver drives and the punters are left to their own devices!

 

[Old Timer]

For the avoidance of doubt, and for clarity, the term "Guard" applies to any person who is undertaking the duties associated with a Guard within the Rule Book.

These are specific Safety of the Line responsibilities, and in no way do they reflect any commercial or revenue protection duties that a TOC may impose upon a "Guard". In some circumstances a Shunter would act as a Guard (would need to check the latest situation) when vehicles were being shunted or moved along a running line.

Unless the train is DOO, then there must always be a Guard when the train is on a running line.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

On some lines the guard has to change the points too.
I am not sure of today's duties, but in BR days as well as the safety aspects of the train, including the emergency brake. The driver would need the guard's permission (as well as the signalman) to pass a red signal, placing detonators on the track in an emergency etc.

 

[Old Timer]

....The driver would need the guard's permission (as well as the signalman) to pass a red signal, placing detonators on the track in an emergency etc.

I am sorry old chap, but I think you have been given wrong information there.

A Driver would "advise" the Guard that he had been instructed to pass a signal at Danger because the protection rules were different in some such scenarios in much earlier times, however the only permission needed was from the Signalman, and this has never changed.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I am sorry old chap, but I think you have been given wrong information there.

A Driver would "advise" the Guard that he had been instructed to pass a signal at Danger because the protection rules were different in some such scenarios in much earlier times, however the only permission needed was from the Signalman, and this has never changed.

Pilotman working is the one that springs to mind. Protection immediately in both directions IIRC.

 

[Old Timer]

Pilotman working is the one that springs to mind. Protection immediately in both directions IIRC.

Depends on whether you are talking about passing a signal at Danger, which the OP was.

That instruction is still given by the Signalman. Protection to a failed train under single line working was not required unless the train was to be assisted, and then as I recall only from the direction from which the assisting locomotive would enter if the Pilotman was with the train.

The protection of the train was the responsibility of the person at the end from which it was being received.

As Ralphchadkirk rightly points out full-distance protection was immediately provided when the Pilotman was not riding with the train, as assistance could come from any direction.

It has been a long time since I had to know the full rules, but that is a synopsis.

Can anyone comment on the only occasion when a train could enter a line under SLW without the Pilotmans permission, and without the Pilotman riding with the train ?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Can anyone comment on the only occasion when a train could enter a line under SLW without the Pilotmans permission, and without the Pilotman riding with the train ?

P5.2 - pass through a trailing crossover which is in rear of the obstruction?
(I don't normally work from the RSSB Rule Book so I doubt this is right!)

 

[Flamingo]

Can anyone comment on the only occasion when a train could enter a line under SLW without the Pilotmans permission, and without the Pilotman riding with the train ?

A rescue train to recover a broken down train on the single stretch?

 

[Old Timer]

P5.2 - pass through a trailing crossover which is in rear of the obstruction?
(I don't normally work from the RSSB Rule Book so I doubt this is right!)

Nope !
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A rescue train to recover a broken down train on the single stretch?

Provided the Pilotman was on the failed train.

 

[Flamingo]

If you are getting into tricky questions, when could you use a red flag after dark?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

If your window is fogging up and you need to clear it

 

[TDK]

Unless the train is DOO, then there must always be a Guard when the train is on a running line.

Unless you are running ECS

 

[Robin GX]

Conductor means driver in Spanish....

 

[TDK]

Can anyone comment on the only occasion when a train could enter a line under SLW without the Pilotmans permission, and without the Pilotman riding with the train ?

To assist a failed train maybe?

 

[headshot119]

If you are getting into tricky questions, when could you use a red flag after dark?

To place around the Pilotmans arm if the normal armband is not available.

 

[Hydro]

If you are getting into tricky questions, when could you use a red flag after dark?

When the site warden can't find any toilet paper.

 

[Flamingo]

To place around the Pilotmans arm if the normal armband is not available.

Well done!

Another - when would you run a train on the main line without ANY lights on the front?

 

[185]

Another - when would you run a train on the main line without ANY lights on the front?

When TinPot Express's trains are very broken?

 

[Intermodal]

Well done!

Another - when would you run a train on the main line without ANY lights on the front?

Snowplough?

 

[Flamingo]

Snowplough?

Correct, give that man a cigar!

 

[Toots]

The fact is in Safety Critical communications you cannot use the words 'The line is not clear' for the reason it could be misheard or words lost on a bad line,so it follows that if a company uses Conductor whilst another uses Conductor Driver (an official title) for totally seperate roles,misunderstandings can ensue...the same goes for different companies referring to their staff as Train Managers instead of Drivers whilst others use the same term for Guards,equally a Shunter can also be a Trainman or an Assistant Train Manager,depending on the company employing them.In an industry that is supposed to have safety as it's chief concern these deviations from the rule book are quite astonishing...

 

[BestWestern]

T......In an industry that is supposed to have safety as it's chief concern these deviations from the rule book are quite astonishing...

You are spot on with that observation.

The sad reality is that there are now so many (too many) different organisations each with their own preferences and ideas about how best to do the same job, that the actual RSSB Rulebook is fast falling almost into obsolescence. My TOC now publishes it's very own 'Appendix to the Rulebook' to further complicate the existing rules with a further set of intricacies and pedantry, and I imagine that many others probably do the same. At the same time, what were once staple Rulebook instructions are being erased and diluted, allowing TOCs to make up their own minds about what they want their staff to do or not do; one of the more prevalent examples being the requirement for Guards to remain at their door position clear of the platform, which now applies on some TOCs but not others :roll:

We have trains where the Driver releases the doors and then the Guard buzzes him to tell him to close them, others where some form of GPS wizardry takes charge of the situation, and others still where us Guards have actually been privileged enough to retain full control of the whole show. We had our TOC introducing a unique buzzer code of it's own a while back for one specific function, then withdrawing it again shortly afterwards. We've been briefed about our management's own preferred method of working trains 'front door only' when the DKS remains fitted in the front cab. And so the list goes on, all over the country I would imagine. Somebody please bring back some standardisation!

 

[Old Timer]

For the purposes of the Safety of the Line the terminology used in the Rule Book is that which should be used for all communications, therefore the term Guard should be used, and I would suggest that the Signalman would be advised to confirm that it IS the Guard to whom he is speaking, given as has been pointed out, the variety of names given to various on-board staff roles.

Only someone who is Competent and certificated to undertake Safety of the Line duties can be called, and may refer to themselves as, the Guard - as far as I can see that is.

It is interesting that nowhere within the Rule Book anymore does it designate what the term "Guard" means, except for a less than adequate mention in the TW series Modules.

I have not checked the Signalling books as I know Toots will come back with a definitive answer as to whether the term "Guard" is suitably established within them.

I imagine that at some point in the future the RAIB will comment upon the need for a clear definition of the title, duties, and role of the "Guard" as this now appears to have been lost in the every further simplication (a nice name for the dumbing down of safety critical publications to Sun/Mirror reader level) of the Rule Book.

Apparantly the concept of employing people who can actually understand and intellectualise the Rule Book and its principles appears to have been lost along the way.