Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[bnm]

Do you not accept that the first priority of a trade union is to represent the interests of its members, and when "progress" involves loss of their jobs they shouldn't fight for their cause?

How many redundancies are planned at GTR?

Oh, hang on. Reading some of what has been said on here, it's a Machiavellian plot by GTR and the DfT to force people out of their jobs. :roll:

In this case though it appears that lines in the sand were drawn by the unions. Sadly for them and their members, lines in sand get blown away by winds of change.

 

[ungreat]

I await Thompsons response if they have been employed before I make a reply

 

[ainsworth74]

Enough evading of the swear filter. I've edited the last few posts I've spotted that did this and taken no further action but if anyone continues to evade the swear filter their posts are liable for deletion.

 

[ungreat]

How many redundancies are planned at GTR?

Oh, hang on. Reading some of what has been said on here, it's a Machiavellian plot by GTR and the DfT to force people out of their jobs. :roll:

In this case though it appears that lines in the sand were drawn by the unions. Sadly for them and their members, lines in sand get blown away by winds of change.

There will be redundancies if this goes unchallenged....downgrading of a job title usually does eventually.From a 29 year experienced railwayman

 

[bnm]

There will be redundancies if this goes unchallenged....downgrading of a job title usually does eventually.From a 29 year experienced railwayman

29 years avoiding redundancy presumably? :roll:

 

[Agent_c]

How many redundancies are planned at GTR?

According to that earlier GTR letter, all of those guard roles are technically going to be made redundant. Purely for a "legal" reason we're assured.

 

[razor89]

Not suggesting it's fake. Seems genuine to me, and sets out GTR's stall quite clearly. Others were saying it was corporate guff.

Evidence of belligerence here, before I'm challenged on that:

- Name calling of those in senior positions.

- "Give 'em hell"

There is an absolute right for the unions and their members to carry on as they are, but in doing so they are failing to learn from history. Meanwhile the travelling public lose a vital public service because these two dinosaur unions continue to believe that progress can be achieved with a combative approach rather than a collaborative one.

I must admit I find it laughable that you're comparing anonymous forum users calling senior managers names with the letters that ALL GTR guards (not just RMT members) have received. Honestly I'd bet those senior managers will have been called worse by their own friends and family. Meanwhile those letters will cause a lot of stress to the guards and their families and put them in a horrible position at work. They pay union fees so that their union can negotiate their interests with the company professionally, but GTR with those letters are attempting to cut RMT out and lump it all directly on the staff. It's nothing short of despicable.

 

[driver_m]

Not suggesting it's fake. Seems genuine to me, and sets out GTR's stall quite clearly. Others were saying it was corporate guff.

Evidence of belligerence here, before I'm challenged on that:

- Name calling of those in senior positions.

- "Give 'em hell"

There is an absolute right for the unions and their members to carry on as they are, but in doing so they are failing to learn from history. Meanwhile the travelling public lose a vital public service because these two dinosaur unions continue to believe that progress can be achieved with a combative approach rather than a collaborative one.

Dinosaur Unions? Is it a case of repeat nonsense again and again until you believe it? Just because it's a favourite cliche of a right-wing newspaper doesn't mean it's true. I've been on strike 0 times as a driver and been balloted for strike action 0 times.

That Union of mine, terrible how it has been so unwilling to act as you've said isn't it. All that talking with management and not getting the braziers out at every opportunity. Southern might want to try it one day..

 

[Chrisgr31]

I assume that if all the guards actually turn up to work for their rostered shifts on Tuesday it would be too late for Southern to run the trains anyway? Would the same apply on Wednesday?

Following week they all go and find a striking junior doctor and get them to sign their sick note!

 

[the sniper]

Someone with a differing opinion to yours does not make them a troll, especially if they lack the vested interests of some forum members here.

You went on for pages and pages goading people into providing answers to your ridiculous line of questioning. We provided answers pointing out you were wrong in the statements you were making as fact. You repeatedly swerved this, telling us you were leaving every time time we stopped you spouting theoretical rubbish. Now days latter you acknowledge you didn't know what you were talking about. It's nothing to do with opinions, it's your unreasonable conduct that makes you a troll.

29 years avoiding redundancy presumably? :roll:

Has he ever been downgraded into a TTE? Your post makes no sense.

 

[Dave1987]

How many redundancies are planned at GTR?

Oh, hang on. Reading some of what has been said on here, it's a Machiavellian plot by GTR and the DfT to force people out of their jobs. :roll:

In this case though it appears that lines in the sand were drawn by the unions. Sadly for them and their members, lines in sand get blown away by winds of change.

I'm trying to work out whether you are anti unions or just plain anti railway staff altogether. Most of your posts would indicate the later. If you have read some of the posts from the people who are actually affected by this and still think they are belligerent dinosaur unionists then you are definitely just anti rail staff. Do you think the Ticket office staff are belligerent dinosaur unionists as well? Because there is a massive backlash from passengers about how GTR plan to close ticket offices. It would also seem that a lot of passengers on GTR support the guards in this and can see through GTR PR about the OBS role. Seems a lot of passengers don't believe the OBS role will last for long either.

 

[highdyke]

It's nothing to do with opinions, it's your unreasonable conduct that makes you a troll.

And your conduct, along with others is perfectly reasonable is it? I've seen time and time again groups of union members round on ANYONE that challenges their points of view. Utterly unable to form counter debates without resorting to calling someone a troll, various names, reporting every post they do not like, telling people they don't know what they are taking about without any insight into their background and so on

I didn't say I was wrong, i said it is more complex and well within a technical solution. Unlike others I do not think I am always right, and I offered the comment in the spirit of fair play and should be taken as much, not used for point scoring.

I have tried to withdraw from this debate 3 times now, and some people just cannot resist calling me names.

You won't win this industrial action and I'll tell you why, the public think you are arrogant. The [railway] unions come across as utterly above everyone from the mangers, to senior DFT officials, the public, the government, anyone that dares to question them.

I am a fairly middle grounded person politically, but if I'm honest you're way over the mark.

Unions are one of the vary few bodies, if they conduct a ballot in the appropriate manner, that cannot be sued by inducing people to breaking contract and causing economic and social disruption. No one else has that right, no company, no individual, it is a very special privilege. And actually something I support.

But I'll tell you what, the self-entitlement to extra pay, gold plated safety, calling all sorts of people names, doing just what you like, as if you railway is run for you, beggars belief. You lot act like North Korea at times, totally out of control. You need some PR and fast. You are speaking to your customers on this forum, and by god you give few an incentive to travel by rail. You are bringing your jobs, industry and employers into disrepute.

My line of questioning was entirely reasonable, I did not say I would disappear, I wanted to give people time to put THEIR side of the story across. Clearly this is not something afforded to the other side!

 

[bnm]

I'm trying to work out whether you are anti unions or just plain anti railway staff altogether. Most of your posts would indicate the later. If you have read some of the posts from the people who are actually affected by this and still think they are belligerent dinosaur unionists then you are definitely just anti rail staff.

I can't stop you and others from believing that, or continuing to play the man rather than the ball.

But for what it's worth I'll repeat what I've said countless times before. I AM NOT ANTI RAIL STAFF. It has to be bold and capitals as I can't use more forthright language to get the message across. Wishing to see progress in an industry that is being held back by outdated union interference is not being anti rail staff. Wishing to see an important public service run as efficiently and as cost effectively as possible is not being anti rail staff.

What those are in this dispute though, are lambs being led to the slaughter. Not by their employer, but by those using them as political cannon fodder.

 

[bb21]

I think it is a good time to remind everyone of my advice in Post 267.

Friendly advice 1: Please make sure that you mind your blood pressure when participating in this thread.

Friendly advice 2: One cannot always convince others, no matter how hard one tries.

Friendly advice 3: Know when to take a step back.

Enjoy.

It applies to both sides.

The government do not want guards, and they have their hands deep up GTR's arse, so Mr Horton, et al, are essentially just puppets. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the proposals put forward by both sides of this dispute, the tone of that last letter was utterly disgusting - arrogant and condescending - but not really that surprising after the previous one.

The bit about the customers really made me laugh. We are the last thing on Mr Horton's mind, judging by his determination to see things to the bitter end regardless, so spare us the PR speak. It's all about satisfying your puppet-master's demands so don't borrow your customers as the shield in your dispute.

Eight years as No.1 at SouthEastern says a lot about your credibility where customers are concerned - just have a look at this forum.

 

[the sniper]

And your conduct, along with others is perfectly reasonable is it? I've seen time and time again groups of union members round on ANYONE that challenges their points of view. Utterly unable to form counter debates without resorting to calling someone a troll, various names, reporting every post they do not like, telling people they don't know what they are taking about without any insight into their background and so on

I didn't say I was wrong, i said it is more complex and well within a technical solution. Unlike others I do not think I am always right, and I offered the comment in the spirit of fair play and should be taken as much, not used for point scoring.

I have tried to withdraw from this debate 3 times now, and some people just cannot resist calling me names.

People spent pages and pages trying to reason with you because you kept saying things as fact that were not true in practice. You kept going on and on like you knew what you were talking about, treating everyone else like an idiot. Everyone kept making counter points because they didn't agree with you, which was a waste of time because you wouldn't respect what we were saying. Finally days later you say "Since making that remark, I have since found out that the situation is more complex than I thought", yet you still won't admit you were wrong and are now trying to claim the moral high ground. Then you go on to make a big embarrassing rant about nasty unions, which is completely irrelevant to the discussion that was had. This is why I believe you're just trolling us now.

You were the one that called us "bull****ers", amongst other things! Who swore at you?

Nothing like a quiz to test the knowledge of bull****ers
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What will the signaller get and what does he do?

 

[highdyke]

People spent pages and pages trying to reason with you because you kept saying things as fact that were not true in practice. You kept going on and on like you knew what you were talking about, treating everyone else like an idiot. Everyone kept making counter points because they didn't agree with you, which was a waste of time because you wouldn't respect what we were saying. Finally days later you say "Since making that remark, I have since found out that the situation is more complex than I thought", yet you still won't admit you were wrong and are now trying to claim the moral high ground. Then you go on to make a big embarrassing rant about nasty unions, which is completely irrelevant to the discussion that was had. This is why I believe you're just trolling us now.

You were the one that called us "bull****ers", amongst other things! Who swore at you?

Let's run over it again, shall we?

What I argued was (mostly) correct, in my opinion:

1. The signaller gets a DSD alarm. He then has a series of regs he must carry out this to protect against the possibility of the driver being incapacitated. I was under the impression even if his radio failed (say during a crash) the system on board the train, or within the code for the base station, would end up showing an alarm anyway. It turns out it does, depending on the TOC/train and safety case. I was under the impression it was universal, I was wrong.

In Kent, the back cab radio was working, and the front one tripped. This is because of a design error.

2. It is fair enough to highlight the Kent case, but in practice the system is being looked at to make it more robust. There are technical solutions which are more reliable, which I have argued all along.

3, The guard didn't save the day in Kent, because it took 10 minutes to contact the signaller. In this case the guard was ineffective. I've noticed you ignored this. It was theorised the guard would act immediately by the people debating with me.

4. Guards have played a minor role, if none existent role, in preventing further collisions in all recent major accidents

- Ufton Nervet, Policeman saw the collision contacted the signaller at Reading, who witnessed several track circuits lit, and points flashing out of correspondence. Public dialled 999. Signals replaced/held to danger.
- Selby: Landrover driver phones 999, operator heard collision. Too late to stop collision with coal train. York IECC has numerous TC failures in area, holding signals at danger. OHL trip.
- Hatfield: Rail broke. Major track circuit failure on KX PSB. Passengers dialled 999. OHL trip.
- Potters bar, station staff and passengers saw collision, dialled 999. DOO train. Major TC/Points failure KX. OHL trip.
- Ladbroke Grove. Signallers tried to stop collision, witnessed major TC failure Slough IECC. Signals replaced to danger/held. Passengers dialled 999. OHL trip.
- Southall. Collision with coal train by HST resulted in overhead line trip, point and TC failure in the area stopping trains and holding signals. Slough IECC took call by STP from driver that survived.

and so on..

5. Guards actually created issues on Merseyside, two occasions. Plus at Ais Gill.

6. Guards and Drivers are not trained in signalling regs, and generally do not have operational experience in this area. This is why they may not understand the whole system - not saying people are idiots, it's just it's not their area. Signallers also have DOO responsibility too. Station staff are also involved in dispatch at busy locations. Guards and drivers are just part of the system, not the whole system. All the DOO responsibility is NOT shifted to the driver.

7. If you want to save lives, it's cheaper to take action with level crossings and other things that pose more of a risk. Spending £7.5 billion on guards over 25 years, which you may only save 1 or 2 lives (speculation on my part, but I suspect the safety case is similar) is frankly not worth it. Retail staff are capable of making emergency calls, frankly as PTS training is about 1/2 a day, they might as well have that too.

8. Guards are better off working within the train helping passengers and collecting revenue - which WOULD justify their role. It would be better if the RMT woke up the changing tech, like they have with the ROCs. You don't see signallers ranting on about how many of them are being made redundant, they just accept technology means things will change for the most part.

9. Running trains in the past DOO has saved lives because a radio has been provided, rather than signals being relied on. So while the system might have had some cons in the past, it has offset this stats too.

10. The RSSB claim it is not less safe, possibly safer in some circumstances.

In conclusion, one item is a bit grey. Right in some circumstances, wrong in others? Okay?

Not trying to claim the moral high ground, I am claiming some people are not exactly perfect either and are pretty good at winding others up or shutting down debate.

Big embarrassing rant? Not really, many will agree. I tried once to stop you, and people like you, digging holes...Have it your way. It's not my dispute, I left the industry 20 years ago. Claiming things are unsafe, when there is no real evidence will just show you up. If you claim something is unsafe you must prove it. And before you say it, no I do not have the stats to prove one way or the other, I am simply countering the points you are making in a FAIR debate. This is the reason I said "bull****ters", you or your union cannot claim it is less safe, however much you wish it was to protect jobs.

 

[bb21]

4. Guards have played a minor role, if none existent role, in preventing further collisions in all recent major accents:

Out of interest, how much are you aware of safety incidents that guards have potentially prevented, large and small, most of which never went into the public domain?

 

[bnm]

Out of interest, how much are you aware of safety incidents that guards have potentially prevented, large and small, most of which never went into the public domain?

False equivalence.

 

[JamesTT]

In 2011 the Mcnulty report said that those trains that could be DOO should be. Sorry but the plans of DFT have been known for at least 5 years. The conductors have known their jobs are under threat for some time. TOCs have decided that DOO is safe whether it is or not based on the evidence they had/have it is. From the release of the Mcnulty report the RMT/ASLEF, instead of burying their heads in the sand. Should have encouraged all conductors to take as much revenue as possible, to never be off their feet when on a train, and really show to the TOC and passengers that they are friendly proactive concientious members of staff. That would have proved the commercial viability of conductors. Sorry but there are a proportion of conductors that are rude lazy disinterested, do not follow dispatch guidelines, hide in a cab area to dispatch, dont make announcements and have a general contempt for the passengers.
GTR are wrong in the way the are bullying staff but sorry the unions should have had a more intelligent game plan from the start, showing the commercial value of guards. So that come this situation the RMT/ASLEF could have negotiate that not only do conductors improve safety, they are all taking £X a year and more than justifying their existence in cash terms. Also everyone of them is providing an excellent customer experience

 

[BestWestern]

In 2011 the Mcnulty report said that those trains that could be DOO should be. Sorry but the plans of DFT have been known for at least 5 years. The conductors have known their jobs are under threat for some time. TOCs have decided that DOO is safe whether it is or not based on the evidence they had/have it is. From the release of the Mcnulty report the RMT/ASLEF, instead of burying their heads in the sand. Should have encouraged all conductors to take as much revenue as possible, to never be off their feet when on a train, and really show to the TOC and passengers that they are friendly proactive concientious members of staff. That would have proved the commercial viability of conductors. Sorry but there are a proportion of conductors that are rude lazy disinterested, do not follow dispatch guidelines, hide in a cab area to dispatch, dont make announcements and have a general contempt for the passengers.
GTR are wrong in the way the are bullying staff but sorry the unions should have had a more intelligent game plan from the start, showing the commercial value of guards. So that come this situation the RMT/ASLEF could have negotiate that not only do conductors improve safety, they are all taking £X a year and more than justifying their existence in cash terms. Also everyone of them is providing an excellent customer experience

Sadly, despite having a certain utopian shine about it, that is a very naive point of view. The whitewash that was McNulty was all the evidence anybody ever needed to show the government's firm intentions. Revenue and public support never have, and never will, play any part in what is cost cutting in its most blunt and crude form.

 

[highdyke]

Out of interest, how much are you aware of safety incidents that guards have potentially prevented, large and small, most of which never went into the public domain?

There have been some incidents where guards have helped, there have been others where they have not. But please enlighten us? The proof of the pudding is if removing a guard has caused an overall rise in problems.

I'll tell you want I think will happen, is you will fight and fight this, making yourselves look totally unreasonable. You're half way there will trying to have unofficial industry action over the 12 car unit and making the statement no DOO under any circumstances. The employers will, in the end, simply enforce a new contract, and because you have been so unreasonable, the courts will agree with them. Safety won't stand because there is no real evidence. They just have to prove there was no other option. You don't have to sign it of course, new people will.. But the reality is, there are several hundred people applying for each of these roles. Most people will sign it because they will not have a job to go to with anything like the same rate of pay.

 

[the sniper]

3, The guard didn't save the day in Kent, because it took 10 minutes to contact the signaller. In this case the guard was ineffective. I've noticed you ignored this. It was theorised the guard would act immediately by the people debating with me.

I haven't ignored it, it just wasn't relevant to the statement you were making at the time. You're not wrong. Some of us discussed this in a thread when the report came out. We don't know what the Guard did, as their role in the incident isn't detailed. Yes, they didn't put down the track circuit clips, but we have no idea what the Guard knew before or after they spoke to the driver or what understanding was reached between them. We don't know if they believed the opposite line wasn't obstructed by whatever had happened. We don't know if the Driver even told the Guard about the GSM-R not working, as their discussion is not detailed in the report.

They did though look after the passengers in the aftermath of the accident, which was reported at the time. If there'd not been another driver travelling pass, those passengers would have been left unsupervised on that derailed train while the driver went for his walk, which is far from ideal.

4. Guards have played a minor role, if none existent role, in preventing further collisions in all recent major accidents

In how many of those incidents did the Guard (where provided) play no role at all though in the aftermath of the accident? Did they provide no help? Would the accidents have been better if the trains were DOO?

5. Guards actually created issues on Merseyside, two occasions. Plus at Ais Gill.

Not sure which Merseyside incidents you're referencing. On Ais Gill, while the Guard of the first train didn't protect the line and prevent the accident (and the Driver couldn't have), the Guard of the second train used the NRN to call the signaller to alert them of the accident, not the Driver, and gave the location so assistance could be summoned. And even though the Guard of the first train didn't protect the line, the report notes that Crewe control may have given them the false belief that they'd arrange for the line to be blocked. It should also be noted that the Guard of the first train moved his passengers to the rear carriage, away from the point of eventual impact, and was the only person to die. Having Guards still made a positive contribution, the incident would have been worse for all involved if both train were DOO.

7. If you want to save lives, it's cheaper to take action with level crossings and other things that pose more of a risk. Spending £7.5 billion on guards over 25 years, which you may only save 1 or 2 lives (speculation on my part, but I suspect the safety case is similar) is frankly not worth it. Retail staff are capable of making emergency calls, frankly as PTS training is about 1/2 a day, they might as well have that too.

Is that where the saving is going? I don't think so.

8. Guards are better off working within the train helping passengers and collecting revenue - which WOULD justify their role. It would be better if the RMT woke up the changing tech, like they have with the ROCs.

But this is the biggest thing for me that I don't understand about the way you guys advocate DOO. Guards do help passengers and in many places do collect revenue. All the time? No of course not. But if you get rid of Guards, you are getting rid of a guaranteed second member of train crew. You're inevitably advocating single manning, but you don't seem to appreciate that. Surely you don't believe that these 'OBS' on Southern or the equivalent that'll get proposed elsewhere will exist in the medium to long term future, certainly not in any great numbers?

10. The RSSB claim it is not less safe, possibly safer in some circumstances.

Source for this information?

And just a final comment, not everyone in this thread that has disagreed with you is 'one of us' rail staff union belligerents, as bnm might say...

 

[DelayRepay]

7. If you want to save lives, it's cheaper to take action with level crossings and other things that pose more of a risk. Spending £7.5 billion on guards over 25 years, which you may only save 1 or 2 lives (speculation on my part, but I suspect the safety case is similar) is frankly not worth it. Retail staff are capable of making emergency calls, frankly as PTS training is about 1/2 a day, they might as well have that too.

Could you please provide a source for the £7.5bn figure you have quoted?

Thanks

 

[Lynford1976]

I think it is a good time to remind everyone of my advice in Post 267.



It applies to both sides.

The government do not want guards, and they have their hands deep up GTR's arse, so Mr Horton, et al, are essentially just puppets. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the proposals put forward by both sides of this dispute, the tone of that last letter was utterly disgusting - arrogant and condescending - but not really that surprising after the previous one.

The bit about the customers really made me laugh. We are the last thing on Mr Horton's mind, judging by his determination to see things to the bitter end regardless, so spare us the PR speak. It's all about satisfying your puppet-master's demands so don't borrow your customers as the shield in your dispute.

Eight years as No.1 at SouthEastern says a lot about your credibility where customers are concerned - just have a look at this forum.

Hmm. If, as a moderator of these boards, they are your views, then how can me - and other members of this forum - be sure that they are being moderated fairly?

 

[whittlesfordok]

but it is level crossing shutting which is the biggest safety issue.
I await with interest when driverless trains appear the unions response

 

[Mike395]

Hmm. If, as a moderator of these boards, they are your views, then how can me - and other members of this forum - be sure that they are being moderated fairly?

Forum staff are allowed to have opinions just like anyone else - though we're also bound by our own rules.

(Also, for what it's worth - with 10 of us, it's highly unlikely we all take one viewpoint on an issue - and we can, and frequently do, ask for second opinions before we moderate on a thread we're involved in the discussion of )

On-topic (and bear the above in mind here):

My own view is that the letter referenced a few pages back to GTR staff is nothing more than scaremongering - and I too wish GTR staff the very best of luck against fighting the culture of management - not just on this issue too, from what I can gather morale amongst the drivers isn't great either.

I think this could be a long, protracted dispute unfortunately, and can foresee this action spreading to affect more than just Southern services requiring a guard onboard....

 

[Greenback]

Mike395 is correct. I'm sure that there are a range of views amongst staff, though I tend to keep out of these kind of industrial relations debates nowadays, as they just go around in circles and get increasingly nasty.

 

[Lynford1976]

Mike395 is correct. I'm sure that there are a range of views amongst staff, though I tend to keep out of these kind of industrial relations debates nowadays, as they just go around in circles and get increasingly nasty.

I don't agree with Mike's 'scaremongering' accusation, but otherwise wise words Greenback. I think I'll do the same.

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

Train crew certainly DO care about disabled people. I never hear a single moan about helping them with the ramp, or in any other way. The timetable can go to hell in a handcart if we need extra time to assist a disabled person. I get out of my cab if I see the guard struggle, or if we have a group.

I feel for a disabled person turning up at a station, not knowing if there is anyone to help, or knowing that there ISN'T someone to help.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Let's run over it again, shall we?

What I argued was (mostly) correct, in my opinion:

1. The signaller gets a DSD alarm. He then has a series of regs he must carry out this to protect against the possibility of the driver being incapacitated. I was under the impression even if his radio failed (say during a crash) the system on board the train, or within the code for the base station, would end up showing an alarm anyway. It turns out it does, depending on the TOC/train and safety case. I was under the impression it was universal, I was wrong.

In Kent, the back cab radio was working, and the front one tripped. This is because of a design error.

2. It is fair enough to highlight the Kent case, but in practice the system is being looked at to make it more robust. There are technical solutions which are more reliable, which I have argued all along.

3, The guard didn't save the day in Kent, because it took 10 minutes to contact the signaller. In this case the guard was ineffective. I've noticed you ignored this. It was theorised the guard would act immediately by the people debating with me.

4. Guards have played a minor role, if none existent role, in preventing further collisions in all recent major accidents

- Ufton Nervet, Policeman saw the collision contacted the signaller at Reading, who witnessed several track circuits lit, and points flashing out of correspondence. Public dialled 999. Signals replaced/held to danger.
- Selby: Landrover driver phones 999, operator heard collision. Too late to stop collision with coal train. York IECC has numerous TC failures in area, holding signals at danger. OHL trip.
- Hatfield: Rail broke. Major track circuit failure on KX PSB. Passengers dialled 999. OHL trip.
- Potters bar, station staff and passengers saw collision, dialled 999. DOO train. Major TC/Points failure KX. OHL trip.
- Ladbroke Grove. Signallers tried to stop collision, witnessed major TC failure Slough IECC. Signals replaced to danger/held. Passengers dialled 999. OHL trip.
- Southall. Collision with coal train by HST resulted in overhead line trip, point and TC failure in the area stopping trains and holding signals. Slough IECC took call by STP from driver that survived.

and so on..

5. Guards actually created issues on Merseyside, two occasions. Plus at Ais Gill.

6. Guards and Drivers are not trained in signalling regs, and generally do not have operational experience in this area. This is why they may not understand the whole system - not saying people are idiots, it's just it's not their area. Signallers also have DOO responsibility too. Station staff are also involved in dispatch at busy locations. Guards and drivers are just part of the system, not the whole system. All the DOO responsibility is NOT shifted to the driver.

7. If you want to save lives, it's cheaper to take action with level crossings and other things that pose more of a risk. Spending £7.5 billion on guards over 25 years, which you may only save 1 or 2 lives (speculation on my part, but I suspect the safety case is similar) is frankly not worth it. Retail staff are capable of making emergency calls, frankly as PTS training is about 1/2 a day, they might as well have that too.

8. Guards are better off working within the train helping passengers and collecting revenue - which WOULD justify their role. It would be better if the RMT woke up the changing tech, like they have with the ROCs. You don't see signallers ranting on about how many of them are being made redundant, they just accept technology means things will change for the most part.

9. Running trains in the past DOO has saved lives because a radio has been provided, rather than signals being relied on. So while the system might have had some cons in the past, it has offset this stats too.

10. The RSSB claim it is not less safe, possibly safer in some circumstances.

In conclusion, one item is a bit grey. Right in some circumstances, wrong in others? Okay?

Not trying to claim the moral high ground, I am claiming some people are not exactly perfect either and are pretty good at winding others up or shutting down debate.

Big embarrassing rant? Not really, many will agree. I tried once to stop you, and people like you, digging holes...Have it your way. It's not my dispute, I left the industry 20 years ago. Claiming things are unsafe, when there is no real evidence will just show you up. If you claim something is unsafe you must prove it. And before you say it, no I do not have the stats to prove one way or the other, I am simply countering the points you are making in a FAIR debate. This is the reason I said "bull****ters", you or your union cannot claim it is less safe, however much you wish it was to protect jobs.

I know of the UFTON NERVET TM, I also know what he bravely did that day in instantly dreadful circumstances regarding his passengers and colleagues and his duty as a railwayman !

I'm sure he'd be pleased to hear you say his role that day was disposable.

Imagine Wootton Bassett plus 30 seconds last year. Do you think a guard would have been disposable then ? When you know what you are talking about, I'll listen to you. Here is another experienced member of train crew bowing out of a pointless debate. You are as closed minded with as little knowledge of reality as the DaFT or you are indeed DaFT trolls

Some of us actually care about our roles and about the people we transport who have a right to get home safely every day believe it or not. There would be a £15 KPA or so pay rise in it for me if I went DOO, How many people would NOT want a £15 KPA pay rise because they don't think it's the right way to go. Why are actually, working rail staff so against DOO ?

Does none of that actually make you think ? Or do you still believe the Govt . has your best interests at heart in every area of it's remit and that M.P. s are all honest and never line their own pockets and that maybe, just maybe, the Earth is flat ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Retail staff are capable of making emergency calls, frankly as PTS training is about 1/2 a day, they might as well have that too.

This is a particularly interesting one given that airline cabin crew are much more like safety-trained retail/service staff than people whose primary role is safety.