LBC reporter checking on train drivers

[transmanche]

They don't want to be watched which is why many of those DMUs had their blinds down.

I thought the main reason for having the blind was to stop dazzling/reflections from the passenger saloon lights at night.

The label on the door says 'Private' for a reason.

I.e. 'do not enter' - not 'do not look through the glass'.

 

[Bevan Price]

They don't want to be watched which is why many of those DMUs had their blinds down. .

Not in the early years - the blinds were only lowered at night time. If they are doing the job correctly - which pretty well all of them do - what is the problem with being watched ? Plenty of other workers are in locations where people might watch them.

 

[1e10]

I doubt it, drivers on phones have dropped considerably since harsher penalties were introduced.

Not in Bristol. I see many drivers on their phone, especially lots who think it's acceptable to text because they're driving slowly in the morning rush-hour.

Drivers managed for 30+ years being watched by passengers in first generation dmus, almost all of which had windows between the passenger compartment and the cab. I never saw any problems on any of my thousands of journeys on those dmus. If they cannot concentrate 100% on their driving whilst being watched, I wonder if maybe some of them are in the wrong job.

Ah, I'm young here so I wouldn't have knowm about such trains

I do respect that drivers may want to work in privacy though.

 

[Chrisgr31]

Personally I dont like the idea of anyone looking over my shoulder at work to see what I am doing and therefore I dont see why a train driver should have passengers looking over his/her shoulder.

Mind you looking over their shoulder could have advantages as one could learn how to drive it, so when you get the announcement that your train is cancelled due to driver shortage you could just jump in the cab and drive it!

As regards train drivers being on the phone not sure I really care, am sure they would only do it when important, and keep calls brief, so why not?

 

[Latecomer]

I think times have changed. Now I reckon there would be a lot more abuse directed towards drivers if they could be seen from the saloon. All those people who force the doors because they had their headphones in when the hustle alarm was sounding as the doors close and get annoyed at the driver because they think they closed the doors on them. People who've missed their stop. The drunken mob late at night. People thinking it appropriate to knock on the window to ask about where they need to change while the train is in motion. No thanks.

 

[BestWestern]

Not in the early years - the blinds were only lowered at night time. If they are doing the job correctly - which pretty well all of them do - what is the problem with being watched ? Plenty of other workers are in locations where people might watch them.

I disagree. Driving a train requires concentration and having somebody - or potentially a group of people, quite possibly frothing anoraks or very lively young children - gorping over your shoulder passing judgement or banging on the glass could be very offputting indeed. I used to very much dislike the few buses we had with clear windows in the partition behind the cab, a little privacy is always appreciated. We also have the issue of trains regularly vapourising a variety of nature's creations, ranging from flies and pigeons to cattle and human beings. It makes rather unpleasant viewing and is not something that people should be given front row seats for, or that TOCs should have to pay out compo claims for emotional distress for when people sue afterwards - we all know it would happen.

We can safely say that passenger viewing into cabs will never happen in the UK, the Drivers and their unions would never allow it, and I can't imagine the TOCs would want it either.

 

[transmanche]

We also have the issue of trains regularly vapourising a variety of nature's creations, ranging from flies and pigeons to cattle and human beings. It makes rather unpleasant viewing and is not something that people should be given front row seats for, or that TOCs should have to pay out compo claims for emotional distress for when people sue afterwards - we all know it would happen.

Doesn't seem to be a problem on T&W Metro or DLR.

 

[notadriver]

Lower speeds on those systems and not exactly deep countryside.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I thought the main reason for having the blind was to stop dazzling/reflections from the passenger saloon lights at night.

I.e. 'do not enter' - not 'do not look through the glass'.

Trams don't have blinds. So it must be so the driver can choose to have privacy.
I was talking about modern units with the 'Private sign' on the drivers door. They could have easily put a window in the door but didn't or in the case of 150s etc its blocked off.

 

[transmanche]

Lower speeds on those systems and not exactly deep countryside.

50mph is around the speed you get on many NR branch lines. And there's plenty of countryside on the T&W Metro route - e.g. deer are not an uncommon sight in the area south of the airport. They've even been known to cross the A1 (sensibly using the tunnel near Kingston Park Rd) to reach the golf course.

 

[ModernRailways]

Lower speeds on those systems and not exactly deep countryside.

Have you been on the T&W Metro? The parts that are served every 12 minutes - not the core section South Gosforth to Pelaw - all go through large patches of countryside. I've been on two trains that have hit seagulls and I rarely sit at the front.

The Metro also gets up to quite a speed at times and as mentioned deer is common on the Airport branch.

Obviously, on National Rail it's a little different and trains can go a lot faster. But everything you would see on National Rail you have a high chance of seeing on the Metro.


Back on topic, is there any reason why people/journalists shouldn't be allowed to see if drivers are on their phones as long as they find out facts about why a driver may have been on the phone before making accusations? I don't see a problem with someone going along, you could argue it's a good thing. Not necessarily good for a driver if caught, but would potentially help the railway be safer.

 

[bronzeonion]

All trains in Japan have windows where you can see from the saloon into the cabs, you can pretty much guarantee that on any train which is at least semi loaded you'll have at least one person standing behind the window, including myself if I'm in the right carriage! It's standard over there so the drivers and guards are used to people watching their every move over their shoulder and the only time the blinds are put down is when going through tunnels or at night time, and that applies only to the front cab.

 

[notadriver]

Point taken about the Tyne and Wear metro but with speeds of only 50 mph and stopping at every station it's a bit different to main line trains.

As for Japan - yeah they have windows bit like in Germany. The power of the train unions must be virtually non existent in Japan as drivers are treated so harshly. It would never work here.

 

[TDK]

I doubt it, drivers on phones have dropped considerably since harsher penalties were introduced.

However they will not necessarily lose their job

 

[jamesst]

Have you been on the T&W Metro? The parts that are served every 12 minutes - not the core section South Gosforth to Pelaw - all go through large patches of countryside. I've been on two trains that have hit seagulls and I rarely sit at the front.

The Metro also gets up to quite a speed at times and as mentioned deer is common on the Airport branch.

Obviously, on National Rail it's a little different and trains can go a lot faster. But everything you would see on National Rail you have a high chance of seeing on the Metro.


Back on topic, is there any reason why people/journalists shouldn't be allowed to see if drivers are on their phones as long as they find out facts about why a driver may have been on the phone before making accusations? I don't see a problem with someone going along, you could argue it's a good thing. Not necessarily good for a driver if caught, but would potentially help the railway be safer.

The problem here is where you've put journalists and finding out facts before making accusations. They're not exactly known for there honesty, not letting the facts get in the way of a good story says it all really...

 

[A-driver]

To be honest if they put windows in (which they won't) then people will just hang their coats over it or find some other way of blocking it up. As has been said, drivers over here don't want people watching them and I see no reason why we should have an audience-and no one here has yet come up with a reason why either.

I should also remind people that this thread has missed the point when talking about cab windows (and let's face it the only people for windows so far are spotters who want to see a driver eye view of their trip for whatever reason) but bear in mind that the crash this comes from wasn't in the UK. Also keep in mind that LBC found no drivers on their phone during their rather offensive and silly test. Now add to that that mobile phone usage has been a strict no no in the uk for some time, the union are very firmly against it and will refuse to represent a member disciplined for doing so and any driver knows that it is instant dismissal and you get to the conclusion that this thread has descended into a rather pointless area. I'm not saying no driver has ever used a mobile whilst driving but it is very very rare and strict measures are in ace to prevent it. TOCs can demand to see our phone records if they have reason to suspect something (or after an incident), some freight companies do random inspections of the cab with mobile phone detectors (like used in prison) and you never know who is sitting behind you or standing on platforms etc if you should be silly enough to chance it and make a call etc.

I'd also add that the rather silly thing about the mobile ban is that we are still allowed (and encouraged to) use the PA/cab-cab and radio on the move. So I can't phone my wife to tell her what I want for dinner whilst driving but I can take a safety critical call from the signaller about an emergency speed restriction etc whilst driving (and there seems to be a trail of reporting anyway that the phone call the Spanish driver was making was an official work call and permitted).

Basically there is no point whatsoever in these windows into the cab as there is no issue, at least in the uk, of drivers using their mobiles or similar which needs fixing. As I say, the only justification people are currently giving for it is that they want to see out the front from a spotters point of view which, lets face it, isn't really justification!

 

[TDK]

The tabloid report I saw was that the driver was using a communicating device to speak to his control regarding delays, this is permitted in the UK for a train driver to use the train to shore radio ONLY WHEN IT DOES NOT AFFECT THE SAFETY ON THE TRAIN. Any form of communication when driving a train whether it is a PA announcement, calling the signaller or control when the train is moving is a distraction and should not be allowed. I never use the radio to call anyone if the train is moving unless it needs to be done in an emergency situation and then I will stop to make the call. If in Spain there is not a rule similar to the UK rule then the driver has not done anything wrong regarding communication rules. If it is found that this call was the root cause of the incident then the Spanish need to amend their rules.

This is a tragic incident and you have to give out your feeling for the families and the injured but if the cause is a lax ruling then the authorities should be to blame and not the driver.

As for LBC, they are looking for a story and to direct this blame to all train drivers whether or not they are in Spain, France, the UK or anywhere else so they have a story to back up their original claims of "The driver was on a mobile phone when the incident happened" when in fact they did not have the evidence to prove he was.

 

[transmanche]

I should also remind people that this thread has missed the point when talking about cab windows (and let's face it the only people for windows so far are spotters who want to see a driver eye view of their trip for whatever reason)

Again, evidence from T&W Metro suggests otherwise. You'll generally see people making a bee-line for the front-view seats - especially children.

It's not the driver that people want to see, but the forward view.

Also keep in mind that LBC found no drivers on their phone during their rather offensive and silly test.

Silly, yes. Offensive, no. It's a standard journalistic response to an event.

You'll see it happen a lot. A report on Royal Mail letter delivery? A journalist is sent out to post some letters to see out long they take to get delivered. The government announces changes to the citizenship test? A reporter is sent out on the streets to ask people some of the questions.

I'd also add that the rather silly thing about the mobile ban is that we are still allowed (and encouraged to) use the PA/cab-cab and radio on the move. So I can't phone my wife to tell her what I want for dinner whilst driving but I can take a safety critical call from the signaller about an emergency speed restriction etc whilst driving

That's simple. Phoning your wife means you could easily get distracted by domestic affairs and/or get emotionally involved. (Little Johnny wants to say good night/has taken his first steps/has set fire to the house.)

Whereas speaking to the signaller is part of your professional role.

 

[SETCommuter]

As a passenger, I find the fact that the journalist couldn't spot one driver using a mobile phone very reassuring.

As for windows into the cabs, again, as a passenger, I honestly couldn't care less. I wouldn't want to watch the driver working - I couldn't think of anything more boring.

However, I do agree with having CCTV in cabs.

 

[TDK]

However, I do agree with having CCTV in cabs.

For what purpose? What is your job role? Have you got CCTV monitoring your every move?

 

[BestWestern]

Doesn't seem to be a problem on T&W Metro or DLR.

I've never been on the T&W Metro - and I presume you've never been on the DLR?! Have a ride and see how many drivers you can spot!

On a more serious note, there is less chance of something 'unpleasant' happening on a self contained system like these, which are very different to the main lines. You can often see into the cabs on trams too, but I still don't envisage it ever happening on 'big' trains.

 

[jon0844]

As a passenger, I find the fact that the journalist couldn't spot one driver using a mobile phone very reassuring.

Indeed. In fact, I noticed a fair few papers that normally like to attack our railway have been saying rather good things about our safety record and rules.

Perhaps it might just help rail staff, as long as one member of staff doesn't do something stupid to undermine it all.

 

[transmanche]

I've never been on the T&W Metro - and I presume you've never been on the DLR?!

Oh, I've only been on the DLR a few hundred times. Does that count?

Have a ride and see how many drivers you can spot!

See my earlier post:

Again, evidence from T&W Metro suggests otherwise. You'll generally see people making a bee-line for the front-view seats - especially children.

It's not the driver that people want to see, but the forward view.

On a more serious note, there is less chance of something 'unpleasant' happening on a self contained system like these, which are very different to the main lines.

Most of the T&W Metro used to be part of the national rail network - in fact some of it still is! And again from an earlier post:

And there's plenty of countryside on the T&W Metro route - e.g. deer are not an uncommon sight in the area south of the airport.

 

[A-driver]

Again, evidence from T&W Metro suggests otherwise. You'll generally see people making a bee-line for the front-view seats - especially children.

It's not the driver that people want to see, but the forward view.

Silly, yes. Offensive, no. It's a standard journalistic response to an event.

You'll see it happen a lot. A report on Royal Mail letter delivery? A journalist is sent out to post some letters to see out long they take to get delivered. The government announces changes to the citizenship test? A reporter is sent out on the streets to ask people some of the questions.

That's simple. Phoning your wife means you could easily get distracted by domestic affairs and/or get emotionally involved. (Little Johnny wants to say good night/has taken his first steps/has set fire to the house.)

Whereas speaking to the signaller is part of your professional role.

What has the Tyne metro got to do with anything? It still isn't justification for having windows into cabs-just because they do dosnt mean the uk mainline needs it-again I ask what reason is there for it apart from to entertain children/enthusiasts etc? Can you provide any examples of incidents which would have been prevented if the public could see the driver? And even then those incidents wouldn't be prevented if no one was actually sitting in the front watching the driver. Having glass screens is a stupid suggestion which will never happen-and as I say if it does most drivers will block them up anyway as I would not be happy driving a train with people looking overt shoulder. Numerous reasons why it's not fair on us and could be more of a distraction etc.

Plus, what happens when you get someone who thinks they know everything about the railways sitting behind you and decides that they think you are approaching a station or red too fast so decides to 'help' by pulling the passcom or banging on the glass etc?

My point about phoning vs radio is that a safety critical communication requires far more concentration on the call than phoning the wife. If I misunderstand a message from my wife because I'm concentrating on driving then its not the end of the world (well at least not until I get home...) but if I misunderstand a communication from the signaller it could have very serious consequences. Considering people drive cars having conversations on hands free phones I see no reason why I can't do the same on a train, especially as its no different from having a non-railway conversation with another driver in the cab, but that is a different debate.

As for in cab CCTV, I'm not against it BUT the issue is how management will start using it against us. It could be very beneficial for drivers during incident investigation, possibly backing up what isn't believed as forward facing CCTV often does, but its when management start randomly watching it and picking you up for taking your tie off, looking out the side window for too long, looking bored, not smiling when rolling into stations, adjusting the seat on the move, waving at a driver on approach to a red etc etc, all of which are completely stupid things to be picked up on.

Basically, if I want to sit in my cab picking my nose, breaking wind, dancing and singing to myself or scratching myself then I don't see what business it is of any manager or passenger to be able to watch me doing so.

 

[SETCommuter]

For what purpose? What is your job role? Have you got CCTV monitoring your every move?

The company I work for is a large logistics company and has CCTV installed in all lorry cabs. This has cut down on accidents & incidents massively - mainly due to the staff being aware that they are on cctv. The number of drivers being caught not wearing seatbelts has dropped drastically for example. The driving style of drivers can be examined. When complaints are received about driving, the cctv can be used to look at the drivers behaviour - he is representing the company don't forget.

In the event of an accident, the investigators are able to look at what happened prior to the event. Last year we had a driver die in a big motorway crash - turns out he wasn't wearing his seatbelt.

The idea isn't to "catch drivers out" but to be able to investigate after events. Don't forget, if you're doing your job correctly, you have nothing to worry about.

 

[A-driver]

The company I work for is a large logistics company and has CCTV installed in all lorry cabs. This has cut down on accidents & incidents massively - mainly due to the staff being aware that they are on cctv. The number of drivers being caught not wearing seatbelts has dropped drastically for example. The driving style of drivers can be examined. When complaints are received about driving, the cctv can be used to look at the drivers behaviour - he is representing the company don't forget.

In the event of an accident, the investigators are able to look at what happened prior to the event. Last year we had a driver die in a big motorway crash - turns out he wasn't wearing his seatbelt.

The idea isn't to "catch drivers out" but to be able to investigate after events. Don't forget, if you're doing your job correctly, you have nothing to worry about.

Ok-so can you please provide evidence as to how many accidents are caused on the railways which in cab CCTV would prevent? It's a very different industry to road haulage.

Plus as you say (and see my post above) it's a slippery slope from being used to investigate incidents (which I an in favour of) and being used to discipline and spy on drivers doing nothing wrong.

If you can supply evidence that train drivers don't do their jobs properly and safely and routinely breach rules then I'll take you seriously but at the moment you are trying to build up a case based on pure hot air I'm afraid-this isn't a problem that needs addressing on the railway. Sure I do things which would have me spoken to if caught on CCTV by an over-keen manager but at no point have I ever put the safety of my train at danger by doing so.

 

[jon0844]

I guess you'd need to put CCTV in the cabs to get that evidence.

 

[A-driver]

I guess you'd need to put CCTV in the cabs to get that evidence.

What evidence though? My point is what do you expect to see on CCTV which may be a safety breach or lead to an incident? What do you honestly think happens in a driver cab which needs CCTV to stop it happening?

 

[SETCommuter]

Again, if you have nothing to worry about, why are you so worried about it.

Do your managers have time to sit and watch cctv waiting to catch a driver out ? If so then there's a bigger problem with the industry than it first appears. The idea is that it would be used to respond to issues - to clear drivers of wrongdoing as well as to highlight issues.

It sounds as though the bigger issue is how the companies manage cctv rather than cctv itself.

 

[transmanche]

What has the Tyne metro got to do with anything? It still isn't justification for having windows into cabs-just because they do dosnt mean the uk mainline needs it-again I ask what reason is there for it apart from to entertain children/enthusiasts etc? Can you provide any examples of incidents which would have been prevented if the public could see the driver? And even then those incidents wouldn't be prevented if no one was actually sitting in the front watching the driver. Having glass screens is a stupid suggestion which will never happen-and as I say if it does most drivers will block them up anyway as I would not be happy driving a train with people looking overt shoulder. Numerous reasons why it's not fair on us and could be more of a distraction etc.

I'm not sure what you're getting worked up about.

I don't think anyone here has seriously suggested that they want to see into the driver's cab in order to monitor the driver. They just liked the forward view that was offered on 1st Gen DMUs - and is offered on ICE3s, DLR, T&W Metro and so on.

Plus, what happens when you get someone who thinks they know everything about the railways sitting behind you and decides that they think you are approaching a station or red too fast so decides to 'help' by pulling the passcom or banging on the glass etc?

Well that's where a comparison with the T&W Metro proves useful - if it's something which you're worried about. Ask them and find out how often people have done that. The trains are undergoing a complete refurbishment programme and the front-end arrangement hasn't changed - which suggests to me that it's not a problem.

My point about phoning vs radio is that a safety critical communication requires far more concentration on the call than phoning the wife. If I misunderstand a message from my wife because I'm concentrating on driving then its not the end of the world (well at least not until I get home...) but if I misunderstand a communication from the signaller it could have very serious consequences. Considering people drive cars having conversations on hands free phones I see no reason why I can't do the same on a train, especially as its no different from having a non-railway conversation with another driver in the cab, but that is a different debate.

Evidence from various studies suggests the opposite. It's the personal and emotional conversations (like the examples I gave previously) which can be the most distracting.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/driven-to-distraction/2007/08/02/1185648060516.html

A number of studies have shown that using hands-free equipment is as dangerous as drink driving.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2006/jun/30/mobilephones.uknews
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ee-mobile-phones-dangerous-drink-driving.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/hands-free-cell-phones-driving_n_3319227.html

 

[Class377]

@A-Driver - I think the main objection to personal phonecalls that I have isn't a safety-based one, but more that it seems to be a personal activity undertaken whilst on-the-job and so seems slightly wrong. Of course, you're still driving the train and doing what you're paid to do, but if I was to buy my groceries and see the shopkeeper on the phone to his wife whilst serving me I wouldn't be happy!