Martin Zee.McGee was the one in the latter case. I don't about the former case.
Martin Zee.McGee was the one in the latter case. I don't about the former case.
Thanks.Martin Zee.
Words fail me. It's like they WANT DOO...
Quite. I don't want DOO myself, but the majority of guards on the south WCML appear to be selling the idea by just hiding in the cab and doing nothing but the doors. Only a small but visible minority are actually found in the saloon.
If guards are to be retained, we really have to move to a situation where they are ALWAYS in the saloon unless they feel their personal safety is threatened, and in all such cases a BTP call really should be logged. Perhaps guard door controls should only be provided in the saloon and not the cab as per (I think) 195s?
IIRC someone upthread (possibly Bletchleyite?) Mentioned the possibility of the dispute being the kick up the rear some guards need. My experience today is that it's done the exact opposite.
I use the first one off Crewe down to Euston occasionally and have always had my ticket checked, often before Stafford. Not today. The conductors both before and after Rugby were pretending they didn't exist. No visible presence at all, and just three announcements on the whole journey. 2 of which were warning of the short platforms. There were no auto announcements either.
The return journey was even worse. Late departure off Euston due to waiting for half of the train to arrive, late of course. Litter everywhere and an overflowing bog. No word from the guard to even acknowledge the 10 minute late start, or even to say it was the Crewe service. Nothing. The first we heard from a member of staff was when someone in the rear of the train pulled 2 egress handles at Rugeley Trent Valley. No manual announcement was made to inform us of the short platform, and I don't know if the auto announcement mentions it in the rear. Either way, the conductor decides to apologise for the extended stop, and I quote, "Due to a complete moron who cannot listen to simple instructions and has pulled two emergency door releases".
Words fail me. It's like they WANT DOO...
Quite. I posted something much the same in the Northern strike thread last year.
I'd never want to see anyone face redundancy but honestly, the role isn't as critical as it once was with the advances in technology, if the guard grade is going to be retained long term, it needs to be refocused towards providing customer service and revenue protection.
What’s the relevance of that statement? Steward(esses) on planes are really there for safety reasons. But as they are there they do all sorts of useful stuff, which they can easily break away from if something safety related happens.Both the above fall way behind safety which is and should remain the paramount concern.
drivers in various locations are again refusing to cross picket lines so the timetable in some areas already appears to be falling to bits.
Regarding guards' visible presence I wouldn't blame them wanting to hide; such is the level of service being provided at the moment they'd probably just get a load of abuse if they tried to do revenue checks.
No thanks. Even in an office you're entitled to a comfort break. I can work up to 7 hours on a train with no real break (IE if I'm lucky I might get 15 minutes of a split PNB in that time with the rest before or after it). If I choose to disappear for 10 minutes for a sit down and a drink then that's my business. The trains I work have narrow aisles and the vestibule area is unheated in winter and has no ventilation in summer.
As usual the uninformed start arm waving about 'should be in the saloon on public display every minute of every day' without considering practical reality.
If we use the loo should we leave the door open for critical appraisal as well?
If I'm working a train from Liverpool to Nottingham I spend most of my time wandering about checking tickets, weeding reservations or tidying up. If I finish my ticket check 10 minutes before Sheffield having left Stockport then I see no reason why on a 6 hour round trip on a moving train I shouldn't stop for a quick cup of tea. Standing on moving trains all day every day is also bad for your joints.
Finally it all comes back to the age old thing of why aren't the managers bothering to manage their staff?
You are correct regarding 195s. Northern 319s are also the same, I suspect 331s are too.Quite. I don't want DOO myself, but the majority of guards on the south WCML appear to be selling the idea by just hiding in the cab and doing nothing but the doors. Only a small but visible minority are actually found in the saloon.
If guards are to be retained, we really have to move to a situation where they are ALWAYS in the saloon unless they feel their personal safety is threatened, and in all such cases a BTP call really should be logged. Perhaps guard door controls should only be provided in the saloon and not the cab as per (I think) 195s?
London Northwestern website said:We won't leave you stranded...
If it's late in the day, don't worry if you're already travelling - we will look after you. Where it is not possible to carry on by train, we will provide a bus or a taxis - and if all else fails, we'll book you into a hotel.
It shouldn't cost you any more...
You shouldn't have to pay more because of this incident.
We will:
- refund any additional rail tickets you had to buy to travel by alternative rail routes, where you followed our advice
- not charge you any extra for parking your car at our stations because of this disruption. Please speak to station staff on arrival at the station.
- consider reimbursement of any out-of-pocket expenses in exceptional circumstances on a case-by-case basis. Any out-of-pocket costs should be kept to a minimum and any claim supported by an itemised receipt.
Yep, it's even worse than last Sat. There are some buses being laid on; however that makes it worse IMO because it is a tacit admission by LNR that they knew in advance that the emergency timetable wasn't going to happen; buses need to be pre-arranged.
If anyone from WMR management is reading this, STOP LYING TO YOUR CUSTOMERS!!
No thanks. Even in an office you're entitled to a comfort break. I can work up to 7 hours on a train with no real break (IE if I'm lucky I might get 15 minutes of a split PNB in that time with the rest before or after it). If I choose to disappear for 10 minutes for a sit down and a drink then that's my business. The trains I work have narrow aisles and the vestibule area is unheated in winter and has no ventilation in summer.
If guards are to be retained, we really have to move to a situation where they are ALWAYS in the saloon unless they feel their personal safety is threatened, and in all such cases a BTP call really should be logged.
Of course.
If the guard has made themselves scarce because they fear for their safety, then there will be other customers on the train who are also in danger. Therefore the 'customers in danger' protocol must be followed - BTP being called, train being brought to a halt at an appropriate station, statements from the guard, etc.
And if the guard has not made their way through the train on a sufficient frequent basis to ensure that there is nothing untoward going on, then presumably they are failing in their duty and should be disciplined.
If guards have become so de-motivated that they appear to be invisible to most passengers that says more about their managers, or all too often the managers' managers.
You have clearly never done the job. It is an unfortunate fact in this day and age that some people have an automatic reaction of aggression towards symbols of authority including uniformed members of staff. Add in a reluctance of some of that subset of the population to actually pay for a valid ticket and the risk of confrontation is even more heightened. In practice guards have to take a balanced view and accept that a certain amount of "verbals" is unavoidable but tolerable with the thick skin that is a necessary attribute for the role. But there will always be situations where in practice it is not worth the aggro to be pro-active in revenue protection: better to ensure safe operation of the train and passengers reaching their destinations than have the train terminated part way through the journey due to the guard being incapacitated by "passenger interaction".
As for summoning the BTP unless violence, or the threat of it, is in evidence they are normally not interested. And if the violence has been "provoked" by an attempt to enforce ticket validity then TOC management will be wanting to know why the guard got their priorities wrong. So guards are caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place. The real world is not the same as that sometimes portrayed on here.
Of course those who are anti-guard will say this merely supports the removal of guards. But who then will deal with PRMs? Or keep Control in the loop during the disruption that is becoming so increasingly common on our network? If guards have become so de-motivated that they appear to be invisible to most passengers that says more about their managers, or all too often the managers' managers. And ultimately the DfT for being so utterly disinterested in the overall passenger experience. But that's what you get when you insist on doing everything as cheaply as possible.
Absolutely spot on.You have clearly never done the job. It is an unfortunate fact in this day and age that some people have an automatic reaction of aggression towards symbols of authority including uniformed members of staff. Add in a reluctance of some of that subset of the population to actually pay for a valid ticket and the risk of confrontation is even more heightened. In practice guards have to take a balanced view and accept that a certain amount of "verbals" is unavoidable but tolerable with the thick skin that is a necessary attribute for the role. But there will always be situations where in practice it is not worth the aggro to be pro-active in revenue protection: better to ensure safe operation of the train and passengers reaching their destinations than have the train terminated part way through the journey due to the guard being incapacitated by "passenger interaction".
As for summoning the BTP unless violence, or the threat of it, is in evidence they are normally not interested. And if the violence has been "provoked" by an attempt to enforce ticket validity then TOC management will be wanting to know why the guard got their priorities wrong. So guards are caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place. The real world is not the same as that sometimes portrayed on here.
Of course those who are anti-guard will say this merely supports the removal of guards. But who then will deal with PRMs? Or keep Control in the loop during the disruption that is becoming so increasingly common on our network? If guards have become so de-motivated that they appear to be invisible to most passengers that says more about their managers, or all too often the managers' managers. And ultimately the DfT for being so utterly disinterested in the overall passenger experience. But that's what you get when you insist on doing everything as cheaply as possible.
Absolutely spot on.
When I first started thinking about DOO, then I was initially tilted against it.
But the more I read through it, the more I become opposed to it. I will categorically support any effort to stop DOO being roled out (for the record, and as far as I'm concerned, DOO means the train having a driver and a driver only. Y'know, like the Driver Only in Driver Only Operation states?).
Ah. I would class that under DCO operation then myself.There is no plan for DOO with no second member of staff on WMT at all. The intention was to have an OBS type member of staff whose primary purpose was dealing with passengers.
There is no plan for DOO with no second member of staff on WMT at all. The intention was to have an OBS type member of staff whose primary purpose was dealing with passengers.
So you have people on the train who will react with aggression to any symbol of authority, and these will be the same sort of people making life unpleasant for every other paying customer on that train, with an undercurrent of potential violence.
And the solution is for the guard to hide away so they don't 'provoke' these people.
Not making a good case for the role of the guard in ensuring the train company's customers have a safe journey.
And we all know how that works out. They'll then say "oh, trains can run if needs be without a OBS/TE as the driver will be able to control the doors" and from there it's a slippery slope.