RMT settle dispute with Greater Anglia

[BestWestern]

I’m a driver of DOO trains. I’d love a guard for dispatch but please educate me here because I genuinely don’t understand this. Why doesn’t the driver release the interlocking that enables passengers to open the doors?

Because the Guard is independent, and should perform their own checks to safeguard against a mistake by the Driver. If a Driver stops short, he is unlikely to realise his mistake in the brief seconds before hitting the release buttons. A Guard, performing the correct local door procedure, should do. That local door procedure also safeguards against a wrong side release, something which a fatigued or distracted Driver, isolated in the cab and remote from the station environment, is highly vulnerable to.

 

[HLE]

No, just a siding further on. P1 is beside the old fish dock. There's a path used by cleaners watering DMUs.

Thanks - interesting how the press release said they disembarked onto a disused platform? Overall it sounds like Tuesday/Thursday was a stark reminder of how ‘guards’ whether main job or not, need proper training.

 

[LAX54]

In this dispute, one side say 'Conductors' the other side saying 'Guards' is there a subtle difference between the two, which is causing all the grief ?

 

[BestWestern]

In this dispute, one side say 'Conductors' the other side saying 'Guards' is there a subtle difference between the two, which is causing all the grief ?

No, none at all. Same job, Guard is the proper Rulebook title and Conductor is the fluffy name badge version.

 

[LAX54]

No, none at all. Same job, Guard is the proper Rulebook title and Conductor is the fluffy name badge version.

Thanks for that, was just wondering, I can see the term 'Guard' being safety critical, but to many a 'Conductor' could just be a ticket seller/on board help and have their safety critical worked stopped at some point.

 

[HLE]

Thanks for that, was just wondering, I can see the term 'Guard' being safety critical, but to many a 'Conductor' could just be a ticket seller/on board help and have their safety critical worked stopped at some point.

It’s a more common title now - along with ‘train manager’. I’ve always found it bizarre that a guard is still technically in charge of the train - things like performing brake tests, coupling (sleeper aside), knowledge of TSR/PSR’s on the route from the ops notice and so on were once something a guard was meant to know but now it’s not part of the role. Even basic route knowledge like line speed seems to be missed out of the training programme these days.

Naturally, as the types of trains have changed some things haven’t been required as part of the role anymore.
But it’s obvious that as the newbies in recent years have come through their
training and passed out, the bulk of their training has been on customer service and revenue duties. All part of the grand plan to do away with guards if you ask me.

 

[Monty]

You can be reliably assured that nobody whose view is relevant considers a wrong side door release to be a 'non-event'.

Can't speak for Greater Anglia but the last guard to open 'wrong side' off a platform was dismissed from their post, a non event it is not.

 

[kw12]

It seems to have dawned on RMT that their strike action on Greater Anglia is going to have no effect on services and they're trying to up the ante.

An overtime ban will now come into effect from 10th October - 6th November inclusive.

What impact, if any, is this overtime ban having on services?

 

[dk1]

What impact, if any, is this overtime ban having on services?

None visible to Joe Public just yet. Saturday's may be more noticible.

 

[CN75]

No, none at all. Same job, Guard is the proper Rulebook title and Conductor is the fluffy name badge version.

British Rail came up with the actual grade and title of 'Conductor' as a guard who had to check tickets on paytrains, and then came up with 'Senior Conductor' for their elite services and longest serving. So all three terms are about 30 years old. The rule book just uses Guard for the sake of simplicity because it is the oldest one, and as mentioned above descends from a job at the start of the railways that is fairly unrecognisable today.

 

[kw12]

None visible to Joe Public just yet. Saturday's may be more noticible.

The overtime ban didn't appear to impact the public at the weekend either.

 

[dk1]

The overtime ban didn't appear to impact the public at the weekend either.

PUGs where used in droves utilising hotel accommodation where necessary. GA are definatley up for this dispute regardless of cost.

 

[Class 170101]

As are the RMT and ASLEF I am sure.

 

[dk1]

As are the RMT and ASLEF I am sure.

The latter is not involved as yet.

 

[Sleepy]

We also have the hidden costs of revenue loss on paytrains as stand in guards don't collect fares !!

 

[Richard1960]

We also have the hidden costs of revenue loss on paytrains as stand in guards don't collect fares !!

I suspect any losses might be made up by the DFT as per the southern dispute the hand of the government will be behind GA which is probably why they are so bullish.

 

[LowLevel]

https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-calls-for-greater-anglia-to-be-stripped-of-its-franchise

Ignoring any RMT language, the letter attached with the link confirms that following an ORR investigation Greater Anglia are barred from using 'contingency guards' until the ORR inspectors are satisfied they have corrected a number of deficiencies.

 

[HH]

https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-calls-for-greater-anglia-to-be-stripped-of-its-franchise

Ignoring any RMT language, the letter attached with the link confirms that following an ORR investigation Greater Anglia are barred from using 'contingency guards' until the ORR inspectors are satisfied they have corrected a number of deficiencies.

Not surprised at the ORR decision at all. Abellio clearly deserved a slapped wrist.

Amusing that RMT are happy to accept what the ORR says when it suits.

 

[lordbusiness]

So when an RMT member makes a similar boo boo will the RMT be demanding that the TOC is stripped of its franchise?

 

[LowLevel]

So when an RMT member makes a similar boo boo will the RMT be demanding that the TOC is stripped of its franchise?

I fail to see how an individual RMT member can in and of themselves be a systematic failure to the degree indicated in that letter and to the extent the ORR would be involved short of killing or maiming someone?

It reads to me that it's not one incident, the whole contingency "boil in a bag" guard programme is being brought into question from start to finish "Planning procedures, risk assessment, training and safety validation".

It's hard to consider what they've gotten right.

 

[the sniper]

Amusing that RMT are happy to accept what the ORR says when it suits.

Why would the RMT not accept that the ORR have finally acknowledged the blatant deficiencies in the training of contingency Guards that much of the industry have been getting away with for decades?

So when an RMT member makes a similar boo boo will the RMT be demanding that the TOC is stripped of its franchise?

Should the RMT ignore systematic failures in training that lead to operating incidents...? I don't think that's in any body's interest.

 

[JamesT]

Why would the RMT not accept that the ORR have finally acknowledged the blatant deficiencies in the training of contingency Guards that much of the industry have been getting away with for decades?

Because the RMT have previously said they don’t trust what the ORR says, e.g. https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-on-orr-and-rssb-wading-in-to-support-southern-rail/ or https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-warns-that-orr-is-not-an-independent-voice-on-doo/

 

[the sniper]

Because the RMT have previously said they don’t trust what the ORR says, e.g. https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-on-orr-and-rssb-wading-in-to-support-southern-rail/ or https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-warns-that-orr-is-not-an-independent-voice-on-doo/

I think we're all aware that the RMT have questioned the independence and impartiality of the ORR. The RMT pushing the ORR into having to semi-publicly acknowledge that there are deficiencies with a TOC's practices, seemingly only after the issues were raised by the RMT rather than identified and highlighted by the ORR itself, is hardly the RMT giving the ORR a ringing endorsement. They've essentially forced the ORR's hand, why would the RMT not acknowledge that?

Obviously it would be better for the usual suspects on this forum if the RMT hadn't reported this, as they'd prefer not to have their faith in railway management shaken by the ORR's validation of an RMT claim...

 

[gavin]

Southern, South Western Railway, Greater Anglia to strike for 48 hours from November 8th Merseyrail and Arriva Rail North to strike for 24 hours from November 8th

 

[HH]

Why would the RMT not accept that the ORR have finally acknowledged the blatant deficiencies in the training of contingency Guards that much of the industry have been getting away with for decades?

I can't recall the same volume of issues in previous disputes, which suggests that EA might be atypical. However, I do agree that the training is deficient in general; not enough time is spent to cover everything in the depth required.

 

[Z12XE]

Will be interesting to see if they get the contingency guards approved for use before this next strike.

If not it will finally make it worth doing for the guards as as yet the action hasn't really stopped anything, the general shortage of drivers on the other hand....

 

[HLE]

Needs a week long strike to make a dent if you ask me. These 24/48 hour strikes just don’t cut the mustard, look at Southern. They can be covered and top brass know that.

 

[HH]

Most of the money making services on EA are DOO already; they only have to cover the Intercity and a handful of other services and they've got 95% of the revenue covered. However, I also don't know why they're having a dispute on EA, because the gains of additional DOO are very minor. Most of the local services have multiple stations with no TO, so if they want ticket money they have to have a second person on board. Of all the current disputes, this is the daftest.

 

[the sniper]

However, I also don't know why they're having a dispute on EA, because the gains of additional DOO are very minor. Most of the local services have multiple stations with no TO, so if they want ticket money they have to have a second person on board. Of all the current disputes, this is the daftest.

It makes sense if you accept that the DfT's motivation for going after the Guards is largely ideological and the end goal is widespread single manning of trains across the country as the standard model, which will deliver the real savings.

If you believe the DfT argument that they just want to 'improve the passenger experience' by downgrading Guards while retaining them on each train, no, it makes very little sense and isn't worth the massive cost and disruption of implementing it in most TOCs. But that is why most sensible people I know don't buy into the angle the DfT sell to the public.

 

[HH]

It makes sense if you accept that the DfT's motivation for going after the Guards is largely ideological and the end goal is widespread single manning of trains across the country as the standard model, which will deliver the real savings.

If you believe the DfT argument that they just want to 'improve the passenger experience' by downgrading Guards while retaining them on each train, no, it makes very little sense and isn't worth the massive cost and disruption of implementing it in most TOCs. But that is why most sensible people I know don't buy into the angle the DfT sell to the public.

Well, it's the goal of one man at DfT anyway. From what I've seen the others are scared of him. He is pretty scary, a bit like a rail version of Perluigi Collina...