Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[LowLevel]

Half true. Drivers are the past,present & future. Guards in this digital age are as ludicrous as the man in a top hat who walked in front of locos with a red flag in 1826. In 30 years our children will find a person who rang bells & got down at platforms as odd as the red flag man. Speedy sticks,& me in my very old age, can be aided by OBS,station staff & level platforms.

I honestly don't get what you find so ludicrous about having a second member of staff on a train who knows where it is, can help if the driver goes into shock following an incident, or gets injured, or taken ill, or can manage the onboard situation when passengers experience the same issues in the broadest terms while the driver gets on with driving, especially as my route knowledge is different to their own. The train doors are one part of a very large issue, and while I believe the guard should operate them, particularly on older stock which isn't fitted with all singing and dancing kit like ASDO where for the man trapped in the cab it seems like routine of opening and shutting 100 x in a shift seems to have gotten to be too much and someone has got dragged.

The whole point with this is that the OBS might not be there, at all, and sods law dictates that one time at least that they aren't there will be when they're required. We aren't talking just busy metropolitan areas here with loads of staff, depots etc and a station that's manned every mile or so here.

It'll be more rural areas like the Coastway where things like tractors and AHB crossings get into conflict.

I can never believe the Kings Lynn line was allowed to be DOO having seen what a 365 looks like at the front end when it crashes into heavy farm machinery - it's reckless. We all take our chances on the Lincs/Cambs lines and serious impacts with vehicles are a yearly occurrence.

Recently I was working a train which got stuck first out on the line and then set back to an unmanned rural station for nigh on 3 hours because a body was found. The BTP, MOM and the rest, the small number that are available in this rural area, were busy dealing with the body that was out on the line in an inaccessible area. It took them quite a long while just to get to the site. I spent hours looking after and trying to arrange alternative transport for passengers with medical conditions, children on their way home from school and people being aggressive because they were stuck. The driver ended up taking the train away ECS and I was on my own with these people, on an unmanned station, including children, with a broken help point, until they'd all been collected by a fleet of taxis.

An OBS could have done that, but as they aren't mandatory, they might not have been there. The driver couldn't go through the train offering use of his phone to those who didn't have one (a surprisingly large number in the area of smartphones owing to flat batteries), doing a passenger count to get replacement transport sourcing efforts on the go, and taking registers of the kids and those needing medication on board as priority cases. That's without things like my carrying people's luggage off the train and up the path to the pick up point.

Or the time I stepped on to the platform at an unmanned station to dispatch and noticed a bloke stood quietly. On approaching him it became apparent he was stood quietly in a large puddle of his own blood from a possible nicked artery. Guess who had to sort that out.

Or the time I was working on a mainline, had finished tickets and popped into the back cab and noticed a large chunk of a passing express was flying around smacking into things and throwing ballast everywhere. I was able to call the box, report our and it's location and which line it was on and have it stopped before it did any damage.

Or the time a full suitcase fell on a woman's head and dealt with the aftermath.

Or the time a colleague had their train hit a collapsed OHLE support post that smashed through the cab and nearly took the driver out.

Or the time a colleague had the stones to refuse to take a train due to poor riding that the driver hadn't noticed and it turned out that it was constantly bottoming out because crucial part of the bogie mounted equipment had been reassembled incorrectly.

We all have the stories but of course they're qualitative, so don't fit well into statistics, and thanks to our actions mostly come out as near misses or non incidents.

The second member of staff should be compulsory, should know where they are, and have the authority to stop or detain the train out of course if required. Otherwise they really are a waste of money.

 

[TheEdge]

If all guards do is press a button to shut doors, why do they take so long to train up...like 6 months or something? Maybe that suggests there's more to the roll than already spoken about..

Because there is so much more to the role than people understand. Something I heard a few days ago was a slightly interestingly comparison...

Guards are like commercial pilots. (stay with me, this not as self aggrandising as you think!) Most of the time both jobs gets paid a very nice wage to do not very much compared to their renumeration. But it is those rare times when we are called on to do the rest of job people suddenly realise what we actually do.

Not too long ago I was the guard on a train in a very serious incident. Without going into massive detail I suddenly went from being what Southern/DfT wan't guards to be, customer service, to actually doing my job properly in its entirely for the first time ever. Protecting a train, protecting passengers, liaising with emergency services, our control and all the rest. Having full route knowledge means that when passengers were self evacuating I knew where to make sure they absolutely stayed away from because I knew that a train could could have appeared from one direction at 90mph! (GSM-R having been entirely fallible that day). Had that been a DOO service we would have had a train with almost 150 people on, in the middle of nowhere, with an injured shocked driver on a 90mph line with no other safety critical member of staff on board. Outstanding, clearly the way forward. :roll:

If people like highdyke and XDM can't see the value of having a second member of safety critical and safety trained staff on board then that is their view. I just hope they don't get caught up in an incident like that all alone. Because they happen. And no system is totally infallible so they will keep happening.

 

[Fincra5]

Half true. Drivers are the past,present & future. Guards in this digital age are as ludicrous as the man in a top hat who walked in front of locos with a red flag in 1826. In 30 years our children will find a person who rang bells & got down at platforms as odd as the red flag man. Speedy sticks,& me in my very old age, can be aided by OBS,station staff & level platforms.

What a stupid comparison. Yes an OBS could help you but if they are present on the train (WHICH isn't guaranteed) oh and remind me how many stations are staffed, fully that is, off the mainline.

The guard is important, the 377 cameras on older stocks aren't fit for purpose, they are off angled, get affected by rain, dirt, sunlight and low light... Apparently they had to gain permission to have 6 cameras per screen as opposed to the suggested 4 per screen. 12 car Train that's scanning 12 little, non-live, stills of the very side of the train which doesn't even give you a proper sense of depth.

Let alone what happens out the sticks if there is an incident and the driver is incapacitated ... The guard is for safety, much more than just closing the door and ringing the bell.

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

Because there is so much more to the role than people understand. Something I heard a few days ago was a slightly interestingly comparison...

Guards are like commercial pilots. (stay with me, this not as self aggrandising as you think!) Most of the time both jobs gets paid a very nice wage to do not very much compared to their renumeration. But it is those rare times when we are called on to do the rest of job people suddenly realise what we actually do.

Not too long ago I was the guard on a train in a very serious incident. Without going into massive detail I suddenly went from being what Southern/DfT wan't guards to be, customer service, to actually doing my job properly in its entirely for the first time ever. Protecting a train, protecting passengers, liaising with emergency services, our control and all the rest. Having full route knowledge means that when passengers were self evacuating I knew where to make sure they absolutely stayed away from because I knew that a train could could have appeared from one direction at 90mph! (GSM-R having been entirely fallible that day). Had that been a DOO service we would have had a train with almost 150 people on, in the middle of nowhere, with an injured shocked driver on a 90mph line with no other safety critical member of staff on board. Outstanding, clearly the way forward. :roll:

If people like highdyke and XDM can't see the value of having a second member of safety critical and safety trained staff on board then that is their view. I just hope they don't get caught up in an incident like that all alone. Because they happen. And no system is totally infallible so they will keep happening.

That is the thing, in this age of absolution of responsibility, and where every action is analised in minute detail, possibly all the way to court, by people in offices, in daylight, when they are well rested, with a fresh coffee and a rule book open in front of them, you need to have trained people who's skills are assessed on a regular basis.

Very, very few safety untrained OBS who's only training consists of selling tickets and saying "Yes Sir/Madam" are going to leap into action in an Ufton Nervet or a Southhall - or a Wootton Basset - oh yes, that one didn't happen - just - so don't say it never will again.

 

[speedy_sticks]

Half true. Drivers are the past,present & future. Guards in this digital age are as ludicrous as the man in a top hat who walked in front of locos with a red flag in 1826. In 30 years our children will find a person who rang bells & got down at platforms as odd as the red flag man. Speedy sticks,& me in my very old age, can be aided by OBS,station staff & level platforms.

Question, a train comes into an unstaffed platform, how do I get on?

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

Question, a train comes into an unstaffed platform, how do I get on?

If the driver doesn't get out, or as one day - and be honest you can see it coming - due to security, he can't


err, you don't mate, sorry and all that, I'd love to help but can't. Tough, bye

Nice eh ? Think that would make me feel good ?

 

[Harbornite]

Guards in this digital age are as ludicrous as the man in a top hat who walked in front of locos with a red flag in 1826.

No they are not, this is nonsense. That was an antiquated setup that took into account the technology and linespeeds of the era. No one on here is suggesting that we should have men walking in front of trains with flags. On the other hand, there is still a use for a guard because they will be more skilled than any OBS, they reduce the driver's workload and they can provide assistance during crises.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Why do some TOCs have non-commercial guards? Isn't it better for a TOC to have all guards as commercial selling/checking tickets when not doing their "guards" duties - both to protect revenue and to patrol the train to field any customer questions and make sure that there's no dodgy stuff going on, eg someone drinking alcohol on a train that's meant to be a dry train?

 

[TheEdge]

Why do some TOCs have non-commercial guards? Isn't it better for a TOC to have all guards as commercial selling/checking tickets when not doing their "guards" duties - both to protect revenue and to patrol the train to field any customer questions and make sure that there's no dodgy stuff going on, eg someone drinking alcohol on a train that's meant to be a dry train?

As fair as I know the only "non-commercial" guards are on the SWT inner services where stops are so close together it would be nigh on impossible to do revenue. Plus not sure how their door controls are set up.

 

[yorkie]

...and to patrol the train to field any customer questions and make sure that there's no dodgy stuff going on,...

It's arguably different role. You may not want a Guard getting involved in a dispute either. Last couple of trains I got yesterday (an EMT mainline and TPE) there was no patrolling going on, and no sight of any on-board staff. I didn't expect there to be, as it was a Saturday evening.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As fair as I know the only "non-commercial" guards are on the SWT inner services where stops are so close together it would be nigh on impossible to do revenue. Plus not sure how their door controls are set up.

I believe so too. They have a separate team for, as SpacePhoenix says, making sure there is no "no dodgy stuff going on" (I believe one of them is on this forum).

 

[Carlisle]

Very, very few safety untrained OBS who's only training consists of selling tickets and saying "Yes Sir/Madam" are going to leap into action in an Ufton Nervet or a Southhall - or a Wootton Basset - oh yes, that one didn't happen - just - so don't say it never will again.

No if you actually research uk rail accidents over say the last 40 years you'll find a number of incidents where catering and ticket staff etc have indeed assisted with the same urgency and professionalism as guards or drivers

 

[313103]

DOO doesn't mean that all the conductors and ticket examiners are getting the sack. TOCs will always value revenue protection. In your example, the ticket examiner or conductor would most likely still be there and would have done same thing. You don't need super special army training to call the driver to tell him there's a sick passenger.

More scaremongering, more misleading Union rhetoric that you've completely gobbled up.

DOO does mean that some if not all conductors will be getting the sack, which when you look at it has a different spin to the way you have put it. Also ticket examiners are not part of the equation in this issue so there was no need for them to be included.

Describe to me what is meant by the saying 'Likely still be there' ? That is not a guarantee. Its like saying the train is likely to turn up.

I would rather believe the rhetoric from my union then what i get from those who comment on these issues but have no idea other then from a enthusiasts point of view
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Half true. Drivers are the past,present & future. Guards in this digital age are as ludicrous as the man in a top hat who walked in front of locos with a red flag in 1826. In 30 years our children will find a person who rang bells & got down at platforms as odd as the red flag man. Speedy sticks,& me in my very old age, can be aided by OBS,station staff & level platforms.

Half untrue as well, Drivers are not the be all and end all in the world, they are the past Like the Guard, they are the present and to a point so is the Guard, however trains have been operating as you very well know on the Victoria line (since 1967) and the DLR (since its inception) without the need for a driver, Now on virtually all London Underground lines with the exception of the Bakerloo and Piccadilly all the driver does is 'Press a couple of buttons'. So they are most defiantly not the future.

Those lovely class 378s have more or less the same technology as a Sub Surface S7 & S8 that are in use on the Met, Circle District H&C lines. They could also operate without the need of a driver.

When you are in old age the only member of staff you are likely to see are those in a mirage or virtual reality like the one i saw at Kings Cross underground station recently. The OBS staff you would like to see will have long vanished before you reach 30. Station staff will also be a thing of the past by the time you reach 30, my current role will cease to exist when those shiny Japanese trains enter service (i bet you will be happy about that).

Level platforms are also highly unlikely and will be until every train is the same. The best you can hope for is that Harrington ramps are installed everywhere.

 

[infobleep]

I feel very sorry for railway management at times. This was a fairly simple change, no redundancies, no pay cuts, met with outright resistance from a hostile (often thuggish) union.

All businesses have to change with the times, money has to be spent efficiently and responsibly. Thus to attract investment from stakeholders such as shareholders, partners, local or central government. It has to be cost effective from a users point of view too, else consumers switch to other products and services.

The outright hostility to shareholders is symptomatic of an ideological union like the RMT. Who on earth invests money is something that produces no return? Do you buy a house and expect it never to gain value, or put money into a savings account and lose money? Of course you don't.

The whole situation is incredibly sad and upsetting. I keep telling myself most railwaymen and women are incredibly decent, understanding, intelligent people. The minority of ideologues are going to spoil it for everyone. There is no magic money tree. Nationalisation resulted in decades of traffic loss, strikes, and a slow moving industry that was just not able to take on the challenges from other modes in the post war era.

If you really love the railway, decent thinking people should link together and find a way forward.

Who invented the universal carriage of goods and who didn't scrap it when it might have helped freight traffic survive? It wasn't the unions I'm certain of that.

The above post in to reply to the talk of slow moving changes when nationalised and the impression I got that they were blaming staff. I was merely pointing out that staff are not always the case of cost effective issues. Sometimes it's the government as was the case I believe with universal carriage of goods. Had they been allowed to cherry pick, perhaps goods would have been more profitable at the time. I don't think the rail unions played a paet in that legislation but if I'm wrong the correct me.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[AlterEgo]

If the driver doesn't get out, or as one day - and be honest you can see it coming - due to security, he can't

...because ASLEF told him?

 

[speedy_sticks]

I feel very sorry for railway management at times. This was a fairly simple change, no redundancies, no pay cuts, met with outright resistance from a hostile (often thuggish) union.

All businesses have to change with the times, money has to be spent efficiently and responsibly. Thus to attract investment from stakeholders such as shareholders, partners, local or central government. It has to be cost effective from a users point of view too, else consumers switch to other products and services.

The outright hostility to shareholders is symptomatic of an ideological union like the RMT. Who on earth invests money is something that produces no return? Do you buy a house and expect it never to gain value, or put money into a savings account and lose money? Of course you don't.

The whole situation is incredibly sad and upsetting. I keep telling myself most railwaymen and women are incredibly decent, understanding, intelligent people. The minority of ideologues are going to spoil it for everyone. There is no magic money tree. Nationalisation resulted in decades of traffic loss, strikes, and a slow moving industry that was just not able to take on the challenges from other modes in the post war era.

If you really love the railway, decent thinking people should link together and find a way forward.

Since you wrote this, I hope you have accepted that DOO and the OBS role discriminates against disabled folk.

It may save money in the long run, but leaving vulnerable folks on the platform to do it is immoral.

I think from the disabled passanger point of view, DOO maybe possible in a couple of years, but we need to put the technology in place first, not treat it as an after thought.

I am pretty sure the change will result in disabled folks who are able to drive add to an already packed road system and disabled folks who can't drive may sue, I would hate to take money out if the fare box.

 

[philthetube]

I cannot understand how one person can be responsible for a train load of people, even if they have no other duties to do. It would never be allowed in a night club or any other closed environment so why on a train?

 

[cjmillsnun]

I feel very sorry for railway management at times. This was a fairly simple change, no redundancies, no pay cuts, met with outright resistance from a hostile (often thuggish) union.

All businesses have to change with the times, money has to be spent efficiently and responsibly. Thus to attract investment from stakeholders such as shareholders, partners, local or central government. It has to be cost effective from a users point of view too, else consumers switch to other products and services.

The outright hostility to shareholders is symptomatic of an ideological union like the RMT. Who on earth invests money is something that produces no return? Do you buy a house and expect it never to gain value, or put money into a savings account and lose money? Of course you don't.

The whole situation is incredibly sad and upsetting. I keep telling myself most railwaymen and women are incredibly decent, understanding, intelligent people. The minority of ideologues are going to spoil it for everyone. There is no magic money tree. Nationalisation resulted in decades of traffic loss, strikes, and a slow moving industry that was just not able to take on the challenges from other modes in the post war era.

If you really love the railway, decent thinking people should link together and find a way forward.

I do pity those on the coal face at times, trying to do their job, help passengers and maintain a safe railway.

Yet a hostile and thuggish management are trying to impose new contracts that mean more hours to get the same pay (ie a lower hourly rate). Coupled to this, drivers are having to take on more responsibility for safety with inadequate equipment to allow them to do this safely.

And for what benefit? Management say there's no cut in pay, so why the change? There's no immediate advantage to shareholders and stakeholders, because the pay is the same, yet safety critical training is being removed.

NOW do you understand why the staff are cynical? I'll go over those points again.

Drivers with extra responsibility - with no increase in pay.
Inadequate equipment to ensure drivers can carry out this new part of their role safely.
Management forcing the issue with no apparent benefit to stakeholders, passengers or shareholders.
Guards being stripped of their safety training. Stuff like running back with detonators to protect the train.
Guards effectively getting a pay cut as the hours are longer when they migrate to OBS.

It doesn't add up. Something will have to give, and that will be the OBS jobs as soon as they can get away with it.

That doesn't make the railway safer, it makes it more dangerous.

 

[the sniper]

TOCs will always value revenue protection.

Just shows how little you know... :roll:

More scaremongering, more misleading Union rhetoric that you've completely gobbled up.

I believe what I've seen happen to various revenue protection departments over the years. I also go by the decimation of the TTE grade across the industry since privatisation. I go by the never ending running down of 'non-essential' manned booking office provision that I've seen. I go by how often TOCs are happy to leave ticket barriers regularly unmanned and as such open. I'll go by my real world experience of this industry.

I don't go on union rhetoric, and I sure as hell won't go on what some naive, blatantly uniformed, peculiarly biased bloke on the internet says...

 

[bnm]

I believe what I've seen happen to various revenue protection departments over the years. I also go by the decimation of the TTE grade across the industry since privatisation. I go by the never ending running down of 'non-essential' manned booking office provision that I've seen. I go by how often TOCs are happy to leave ticket barriers regularly unmanned and as such open. I'll go by my real world experience of this industry.

I don't go on union rhetoric, and I sure as hell won't go on what some naive, blatantly uniformed, peculiarly biased bloke on the internet says...

Take a look at all the additional RPIs and ATEs employed by GWR in the last couple of years. Note that their barriers are staffed from dawn to late evening.

I don't go by what peculiarly biased vested interests say on this forum. I go by the evidence of my own eyes.

 

[DarloRich]

Apologies for the delay in coming back to you - i have no interweb at home at present

Well put it like this, the railway is generally not a good investment and would collapse if there was no government input for the most part. Are you seriously arguing the DFT should not seek to limit tax payers exposure, or should we just throw good money after bad? Over 50% of the public never use railways, outside the major metropolitian railways play a very minor role indeed in our transport provision. The DFT have to be seen to be spending OUR money in a cost effective manner. BRT, LRT and roads all compete for cash.

I agree - however these changes wont really help with the bottom line, at least until all the high earning guards can be forced out to be replaced in turn by staff on less good T&C's making it easier to bin them.

Passengers want a more reliable service which costs them less - will these changes help deliver that? I would also disagree with your supposition that trains aren't used by lots of people. There are billions of journeys per year.

Employees are employees. They should be consulted and respected, they are not there to run businesses. There is nothing to stop them starting one of their own!

Do you feel the Southern employees have been respected? To my mind that one of the big issues worsening the situation. The treatment of staff by thier employer has been very poor.

And of course employees are at liberty to start their own business - IF they have the access to funding, are able to mitigate the risks to thier home and health and their area of work is one that allows for easy access and start ups. That's not something railways are well know n for, at least in the direct on train operational staff sector!

Apply for the job yourself. I don't fancy running a large business like GTR, especially in a really difficult industry like Rail. It's a huge responsibility.

They carry little personal responsibility as TOC directors. Are they personally liable for carrying the financial burden of the company? Will they be held liable for any operational incidents? Do they carry any personal financial risk? Are they personally liable for obtaining and managing the funding for the company?

Of course, they answer to the shareholders and board but it isn't the same as embodying the company in the way a director of a limited company does.

My friend is the MD of his own company. He has worked hard since we left school to build up a business. However, If he makes a bad investment call, or the bank rate changes, or a big customer folds or one of his guys is injured at work he potentially looses everything and is responsible for 27 blokes being put out of work. I would assume the GTR directors don't have thier homes assigned as security to cover any GTR debts like my friend does for his company debts.

I think you make some very good points and I don't always go along with the notion that management are 'the enemy'!

Neither do I - a joint, mature, approach will always get better results - however the staff seem to have been treated very poorly in this example.

I've been thinking of the late Bob Crow. He was quite capable of the hyperbolic rhetoric, of course, yet I can't help feeling that under his leadership, both drivers and OBS'ers (were guards) would now be a lot better off.

Just a hunch and I wonder if any of you have had a similar feeling.

He always knew where the deal was and how to present that deal as a success. I am told he was a very tough but fair negotiator

I have a serious question?

What would you do? We have a tightening public purse, you are competing to run a franchise, or sign an agreement with the DFT who mainly write the rules.

The DFT have to balance spending on all transport modes, but want a greater return from rail. The DFT sees cost savings and enhanced customer service and revenue protection with DOO and writes it into the spec.

Two Trade unions issue public statements saying no more DOO, in fact we want guards on every train. Technology is moving on all the time.

The industry returns about £350 million "profit" a year, staff costs are directly £3 billion.

You have the tools of productivity, innovation, marketing.

We have several competing groups: Shareholders who want a return else they will invest elsewhere, Passengers want decent services and value for mone,y staff want decent pay and conditions and the DFT want value for money.

How would you play it?

I've thought about it a lot, and I really don't know.

You do what GTR (and the unions) seem to have been unwilling or unable to do:

You engage with the unions and staff early, involve them in the organisational design, communicate clearly and openly what the issues are, look beyond the public statements and stances of the actors and try to negotiate, in an honest, open, meaningful and mature fashion, some form of compromise that lets both sides look like they haven't lost.


Or you go out from day one in a belligerent, cocksure manner designed to engender a confrontation and then complain (but secretly relish) when you get one!

It doesn't help that this has been an overtly political battle between the Tories and unions via thier proxies at GTR with the passengers becoming collateral damage.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Take a look at all the additional RPIs and ATEs employed by GWR in the last couple of years. Note that their barriers are staffed from dawn to late evening.

I don't go by what peculiarly biased vested interests say on this forum. I go by the evidence of my own eyes.

But are these new staff on less good terms than the older staff? Is thier job as secure? What sort of contact are they on? Were they displaced staff?

 

[Captain Chaos]

Take a look at all the additional RPIs and ATEs employed by GWR in the last couple of years. Note that their barriers are staffed from dawn to late evening.

I don't go by what peculiarly biased vested interests say on this forum. I go by the evidence of my own eyes.

I feel it's important to point out that a large number of those gatline, ATE and RPI roles were filled by RPO's who were made redundant particularly in the east of the region. Creating vacancies is one thing and should be applauded. But it's also worth knowing where those who are filling them have come from...

 

[HLE]

In other news it looks like Charles Horton has found another job....

 

[LowLevel]

Take a look at all the additional RPIs and ATEs employed by GWR in the last couple of years. Note that their barriers are staffed from dawn to late evening.

I don't go by what peculiarly biased vested interests say on this forum. I go by the evidence of my own eyes.

Ones I know of -

London Midland - made all revenue protection staff redundant and employed fewer afterwards on less favourable terms, dispensed with all ATEs and slashed station manning/booking office hours, large stations like Tamworth often unmanned in the evening due to 'staff shortages'.
EMT - ran down ATE positions to the point of hardly anything. A few more revenue protection officers recruited. Barriers where they exist are open in the evening and quite often unmanned in the daytime.
XC - attempting to dispense with RPIs and make them into all round cleaners/other services instead.
Gatwick Express - all on train staff dispensed with.

So from my own experience I see little reason for optimism in terms of 'non essential' staff.

 

[Antman]

I cannot understand how one person can be responsible for a train load of people, even if they have no other duties to do. It would never be allowed in a night club or any other closed environment so why on a train?

I'm not sure that is a reasonable comparison, if it were you could say two people were nowhere near enough either, where would it end?

 

[tsr]

Meanwhile, commuters are singing songs of mourning for their lost services...

https://www.facebook.com/BBCSouthToday/videos/1079806778776578/

 

[highdyke]

Since you wrote this, I hope you have accepted that DOO and the OBS role discriminates against disabled folk.

It may save money in the long run, but leaving vulnerable folks on the platform to do it is immoral.

I think from the disabled passanger point of view, DOO maybe possible in a couple of years, but we need to put the technology in place first, not treat it as an after thought.

I am pretty sure the change will result in disabled folks who are able to drive add to an already packed road system and disabled folks who can't drive may sue, I would hate to take money out if the fare box.

No I do not accept it discriminates if properly managed.

Furthermore I would expect the railway to make use of new technology to run a cost effective, modern, capacity constrained transport system, that does what it says on the tin in the interests of customers and stakeholders.

Crossrail and Thameslink core will be ATO, I would expect this to be extended from the core over time. The GWML, GEML and most parts of the core Southern network are extremely capacity constrained and London is set to grow considerably over the years. I would expect other commuter networks round the country to follow suit.

I would expect all metros to be fully automated to "Grade of Automation 4 Systems" over the next 20 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_urban_metro_subway_systems

I would also expect branch line shuttled to be fully automated in the next 20 years, once obstacle deflectors are fitted and level crossing eliminated.

I would also expect HS2 to be built as a primarily automated system.

There are deep questions over the efficiency of lines that are provided with a guards on 30k plus a year, a driver on 40k plus a year, and a signalbox every few miles with the signalman on 30k plus, that carry less than a few small percent modal share.

It is not an efficient transport system, wages are included in any reopening or enhancement scheme. That is why the Ivanhoe line phase 2 was thrown out recently, It's more cost effective to put a bus on almost all of the time in many cases. That is a fact.

On freight, Autohaul or something similar to Positive train control will become the norm too.

The railway is simply a transport system designed to move people and goods from A to B with advantages in capacity, comfort and speed. It should move with the times and these things can be managed.

http://www.irse.org/knowledge/publicdocuments/IRSE_Seminar_16_Nov_2010_web.pdf

 

[Antman]

Since you wrote this, I hope you have accepted that DOO and the OBS role discriminates against disabled folk.

It may save money in the long run, but leaving vulnerable folks on the platform to do it is immoral.

I think from the disabled passanger point of view, DOO maybe possible in a couple of years, but we need to put the technology in place first, not treat it as an after thought.

I am pretty sure the change will result in disabled folks who are able to drive add to an already packed road system and disabled folks who can't drive may sue, I would hate to take money out if the fare box.

So would you use the same argument to have conductors on buses?

 

[Mintona]

No I do not accept it discriminates if properly managed.

Furthermore I would expect the railway to make use of new technology to run a cost effective, modern, capacity constrained transport system, that does what it says on the tin in the interests of customers and stakeholders.

Crossrail and Thameslink core will be ATO, I would expect this to be extended from the core over time. The GWML, GEML and most parts of the core Southern network are extremely capacity constrained and London is set to grow considerably over the years. I would expect other commuter networks round the country to follow suit.

I would expect all metros to be fully automated to "Grade of Automation 4 Systems" over the next 20 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_urban_metro_subway_systems

I would also expect branch line shuttled to be fully automated in the next 20 years, once obstacle deflectors are fitted and level crossing eliminated.

I would also expect HS2 to be built as a primarily automated system.

There are deep questions over the efficiency of lines that are provided with a guards on 30k plus a year, a driver on 40k plus a year, and a signalbox every few miles with the signalman on 30k plus, that carry less than a few small percent modal share.

It is not an efficient transport system, wages are included in any reopening or enhancement scheme. That is why the Ivanhoe line phase 2 was thrown out recently, It's more cost effective to put a bus on almost all of the time in many cases. That is a fact.

On freight, Autohaul or something similar to Positive train control will become the norm too.

The railway is simply a transport system designed to move people and goods from A to B with advantages in capacity, comfort and speed. It should move with the times and these things can be managed.

http://www.irse.org/knowledge/publicdocuments/IRSE_Seminar_16_Nov_2010_web.pdf

Aha - full automation. Your true wet dream scenario. I'm not sure Network Rail have enough money to finish half the work they've got going on at the moment, I imagine fitting 150s with ATO will be somewhat down the pecking order
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So would you use the same argument to have conductors on buses?

Straw man alert!

On a bus, a passenger in a wheelchair boards right next to the driver. He's not going to miss him standing at the bus stop. Whereas a train driver looking along a 12 carriage platform with a tiny monitor being dazzled by sunshine showing only the area just next to the doors isn't likely to see any particular passenger waiting to board, and so will depart once he's reasonably sure the doors are clear.

 

[NSEFAN]

No I do not accept it discriminates if properly managed.

I must be missing something. If there are fewer members of staff employed on the trains to help customers with reduced mobility, said passengers may not be able to turn up and go any more, requiring instead to book 24 hours in advance. How is that not discriminatory? A demographic who are currently able to turn up and go are now inconvenienced by the removal of a guaranteed second member of staff on the train.

 

[Wolfie]

Since you wrote this, I hope you have accepted that DOO and the OBS role discriminates against disabled folk.

It may save money in the long run, but leaving vulnerable folks on the platform to do it is immoral.

I think from the disabled passanger point of view, DOO maybe possible in a couple of years, but we need to put the technology in place first, not treat it as an after thought.

I am pretty sure the change will result in disabled folks who are able to drive add to an already packed road system and disabled folks who can't drive may sue, I would hate to take money out if the fare box.

my bold

Actually what is far more likely, and I wouln't blame them in the slightest, is a campaign of effective civil disobedience by disabled activists targetting GTR. Expect trains to go nowhere when disabled people tie/chain etc themselves to them as a result of zero support in using the service and/or their supporters lie on the tracks in front of them. It happened in London and big cities in the 1980s with buses and led to the current legislation, it can and likely will happen again.

Vile inept boss, vile company! Just stupid enough to pour petrol on the situation by trying to use railway byelaws in such a situation..