Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[FordFocus]

As your aware highdyke the railway is some what different. If you offer operational staff i.e. signallers, drivers, guards and a few other grades fixed contracts in the way of some airlines then you can potentially open yourself up to having staffing issues when the contract is up.

Example, if you had a depot of 60 drivers and 10 drivers contracts were up and all 10 of them didn't get renewed, retirement, face doesn't fit, moved to a better paying company or just took a break from work then your immediately short staffed. As we've seen with certain TOCs when they rely too much on rest day working, trains get cancelled and questions are asked from high above.

My TOC has a lot of fixed contracts in the clerical grades though. Most "new" jobs like social media are contracts.

 

[highdyke]

As your aware highdyke the railway is some what different. If you offer operational staff i.e. signallers, drivers, guards and a few other grades fixed contracts in the way of some airlines then you can potentially open yourself up to having staffing issues when the contract is up.

Example, if you had a depot of 60 drivers and 10 drivers contracts were up and all 10 of them didn't get renewed, retirement, face doesn't fit, moved to a better paying company or just took a break from work then your immediately short staffed. As we've seen with certain TOCs when they rely too much on rest day working, trains get cancelled and questions are asked from high above.

My TOC has a lot of fixed contracts in the clerical grades though. Most "new" jobs like social media are contracts.

Well yes, the railway is pretty much the last vestige of the permanent contract and indeed final salary pension. Not sure that it's universal. I did hear that some signallers now were on contracts, drivers employed by some none-TOC companies are even on zero hours contacts.

Zero hours btw, I totally disagree with as it puts all the power in the hands of the employer.

Shorters contracts, not ideal, but it's the way the world has gone generally, with the need for companies to be nimble to compete with others here and abroad. It's pretty standard and outside the railway bubble unfortunately you won't get much support.

 

[FordFocus]

I've heard that some signallers are on contracts, I think all the new external vacancies are all contracts now presumably for the ROC fiasco and to avoid the need for PT&R. At least you know what your signing up for I suppose. Makes sense and I've not heard the unions kicking up a huge fuss.

ASLEF are currently in dispute with Colas who took on the infrastructure contract. I believe Colas want a lot of their cheaper zero hours drivers to take on a lot of the work that came from Serco and DB before that..

 

[Robertj21a]

Well yes, the railway is pretty much the last vestige of the permanent contract and indeed final salary pension. Not sure that it's universal. I did hear that some signallers now were on contracts, drivers employed by some none-TOC companies are even on zero hours contacts.

Zero hours btw, I totally disagree with as it puts all the power in the hands of the employer.

Shorters contracts, not ideal, but it's the way the world has gone generally, with the need for companies to be nimble to compete with others here and abroad. It's pretty standard and outside the railway bubble unfortunately you won't get much support.

This is very relevant, and often forgotten. Out in the big wide world many jobs are not guaranteed at all, or just for a few months at most. Most office/shop jobs may well have just, say, one month's notice, but most staff recognise that the employer simply can't enter into long term contracts when they have little knowledge of what may happen in 3-6-12 months time.

 

[highdyke]

I've heard that some signallers are on contracts, I think all the new external vacancies are all contracts now presumably for the ROC fiasco and to avoid the need for PT&R. At least you know what your signing up for I suppose. Makes sense and I've not heard the unions kicking up a huge fuss.

ASLEF are currently in dispute with Colas who took on the infrastructure contract. I believe Colas want a lot of their cheaper zero hours drivers to take on a lot of the work that came from Serco and DB before that..

With signalling, you expect to be made redundant at some point, mega centres are becoming more and more the norm across the world and NR is just following it. Like driving it's very easy to screw up, and not have your contract renewed. Degree level in the US these days, not sure about Europe.

https://up.jobs/apprentice-train-dispatcher.html

Union Pacific, Harriman, Omaha.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uU080ixw8aY

BNFS, Fort Worth

ProRail, Utrecht, Netherlands

Zaragoza, Spain

and so on

 

[HowardGWR]

Surely there is a difference between NR signalmen (nationalised) and TOCs (private) where security of employment is concerned?

 

[Bromley boy]

Well yes, the railway is pretty much the last vestige of the permanent contract and indeed final salary pension. Not sure that it's universal. I did hear that some signallers now were on contracts, drivers employed by some none-TOC companies are even on zero hours contacts.

Zero hours btw, I totally disagree with as it puts all the power in the hands of the employer.

Shorters contracts, not ideal, but it's the way the world has gone generally, with the need for companies to be nimble to compete with others here and abroad. It's pretty standard and outside the railway bubble unfortunately you won't get much support.

All very true. The railway is certainly one of the last vestiges of decent terms and conditions, secure (to a point) and stable employment in an increasingly insecure world.

Something well worth fighting to defend, in my view, rather than simply rolling-over and joining the race to the bottom.

 

[Dave1987]

I did not tell anyone to wait for a RAIB report at all, read my post again.

Dave, is it true that passengers detrain themselves both on DOO and guarded services or not? Can you show me that the presence of a guard prevents passenger self-detrainments? Because this seems to be the gold standard of the "keep the guard" argument at this point in the thread.

While we're on RAIB reports, show me where the RAIB discuss how unsafe DOO is with the Kentish Town incident: https://assets.publishing.service.g...0b6024100016d/R072012_120523_Kentish_Town.pdf (clue: don't look too hard - the driver and FCC control via social media kept passengers updated but they still broke out of the train. What else is a guard going to do, wrestle 200 people to the ground?)

I don't have the time or inclination to file through decades of accident reports, and I suspect neither do you, or else you'd be doing it already.

I can't find it now but I seem to remember you straight said people should wait until the RAIB report. Yet you quite happily link a media report. Double standards......

I have read Kentish Town report thoroughly. The driver was overwhelmed with all the stuff they needed to do so couldn't keep the passengers informed to the level they wanted to be. A guard may well have helped the situation and could have assisted the driver. I can't honestly believe you think social media is a good replacement for a guard on the train. What exactly is your railway experience?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I have noticed that the people who advocate DOO on this thread are not actually drivers but seem to believe they know our job better than we do.

 

[AlterEgo]

I can't find it now but I seem to remember you straight said people should wait until the RAIB report. Yet you quite happily link a media report. Double standards......

I have read Kentish Town report thoroughly. The driver was overwhelmed with all the stuff they needed to do so couldn't keep the passengers informed to the level they wanted to be. A guard may well have helped the situation and could have assisted the driver. I can't honestly believe you think social media is a good replacement for a guard on the train. What exactly is your railway experience?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I have noticed that the people who advocate DOO on this thread are not actually drivers but seem to believe they know our job better than we do.

Sorry, where did I say social media was a replacement for a guard on a train? Please address the specific points. The RAIB didn't mention the lack of a guard as a factor nor did they recommend the reinstatement of the guard. Some people would have this believe this is somehow political or personal against guards, but I just don't see the evidence for that I'm afraid.

As far as railway experience goes, I've worked primarily on the customer side of things. Including social media! Social media has many uses in informing people but I agree it should be secondary to information coming from a control centre or member of staff on a train. I've also worked in a TOC Control, so I've seen a lot of mistakes, a lot of people deal with incidents - while I'm not and never have been a driver I am aware of the myriad of ops problems the railway can present. My dad was an ASLEF organiser and tube driver. (He thinks DOO is fine and he started as a guard, btw!)

I agree that a guard might have been able to assist the driver and make his job easier; indisputable. But in essence, the Kentish Town incident was one of poor management right the way through the TOC concerned.

Do you accept that passengers detrain and put themselves at risk whether a guard is present or not?

 

[Taunton]

passengers detraining themselves isn't a phenomenon confined to DOO trains. It's very disingenuous for posters to imply that it is, by bringing up Kentish Town repeatedly.

Detraining passengers was just one of many aspects that the operator simply could not get to grips with in the Kentish Town incident, it was an absolute shambles from beginning to end, which showed they had just not thought things through, starting with never testing whether the relatively new train's standby batteries performed to spec (which they didn't), or that the manufacturer had been allowed to disable the toilets to reduce power demand, at a time when, stuck between stations for hours, they are critically needed.

As for having two types of trains in the fleet with incompatible couplings, a rescue plan for failures which envisaged assistance by the train behind coupling up, and then timetabling the units so the trains were alternately of each type so rear end assistance would never be possible, words just fail me ...

 

[highdyke]

Looking through the archives back 50 years, I've not been able to find one incident that a guard has prevented a second collision by providing full detonator protection. I stand to be corrected on that. Quite a few incidents caused by/ or a factor was 'Ding ding and away'

Bellgrove,
Hyde North,
Paisley,
Newton

The guard was rumoured to be driving the train at Cowden, but couldn't be proved, although he had been reprimanded twice for doing so.

Nobody has been killed through DOO operation to date.

 

[craigybagel]

Looking through the archives back 50 years, I've not been able to find one incident that a guard has prevented a second collision by providing full detonator protection. I stand to be corrected on that. Quite a few incidents caused by/ or a factor was 'Ding ding and away'

Bellgrove,
Hyde North,
Paisley,
Newton

Nobody has been killed through DOO operation to date.

The train that had the SPAD at Newton that caused the accident was DOO. At the time of Paisley giving two on the red was permitted, it was left up to the driver to wait until the signal cleared. Hyde North was also blamed on the driver and his training.

 

[LowLevel]

Looking through the archives back 50 years, I've not been able to find one incident that a guard has prevented a second collision by providing full detonator protection. I stand to be corrected on that. Quite a few incidents caused by/ or a factor was 'Ding ding and away'

Bellgrove,
Hyde North,
Paisley,
Newton

The guard was rumoured to be driving the train at Cowden, but couldn't be proved, although he had been reprimanded twice for doing so.

Nobody has been killed through DOO operation to date.

But you don't always hear about the little things do you?

I know of several incidents in the last couple of years where the guard has intervened, including but not limited to stopping a train hitting a road vehicle in an AB section in an area GSMR is known to be unreliable by simply running up the track and waving a red flag, stopping a train with a large chunk of it's superstructure hanging off and striking things lineside at 125 mph (push pull set with the driver totally unaware that a large chunk of the class 91 at the rear had broken off and was blowing in the wind, stopped by the guard of a train heading the other way making an emergency call to the signaller while shock horror traveling in the rear cab), refusing to take a train further due to ride issues when it turned out half the suspension was missing from the bogie assembly having been incorrectly replaced after maintenance, taking over a train after the driver was nearly decapitated by a failed OHLE structure that collapsed across the line, dealing with a person who killed themselves by setting fire to themselves in a toilet subsequently setting fire to the train in the process, looking after a train load of passengers in a car park including children for over 2 hours at an unmanned station in the middle of nowhere following a fatality after the driver took the train away ECS, dealing with a train and it's passengers after a dead body demolished the corridor connection and trapped the driver in his cab and the list continues, I could go on for hours just with my own exploits let alone anyone else's.

Some of those things required the full training and basic authority of a guard, others didn't but what they did require was the person to be there.

What does matter is the list of events that nearly become big problems but don't because of the second person but these are never quantified. What I do believe is genuine though is the look of horror on the face of a manager of our safety team when single manned trains were mentioned - she just couldn't understand why anyone would want to do it.

The DfT are clearly capable of micromanaging these things and should not be allowed to play the cloak and dagger card.

 

[Chrisgr31]

I have been looking through RAIB reports back to 18 October 2015.

There appear to 11 cases of passengers being trapped in doors which they have investigated. Of those 3 involved London Underground (all DOO) one Metro (also DOO) and 7 National Rail of which 5 were DOO. I think there might be another one involving guards but couldnt see it on a quick look.

Of those involving guards 2 have resulted in prosecutions which implies the guards are considered to have done something wrong. In one though the case has yet to receive court so the guard might be innocent.

As far as I know no drivers have been charged which seems to indicate that trap and drag accidents involving drivers are accepted to be a risk, but not for guards.

 

[highdyke]

But you don't always hear about the little things do you?

I know of several incidents in the last couple of years where the guard has intervened, including but not limited to stopping a train hitting a road vehicle in an AB section in an area GSMR is known to be unreliable by simply running up the track and waving a red flag, stopping a train with a large chunk of it's superstructure hanging off and striking things lineside at 125 mph (push pull set with the driver totally unaware that a large chunk of the class 91 at the rear had broken off and was blowing in the wind, stopped by the guard of a train heading the other way making an emergency call to the signaller while shock horror traveling in the rear cab), refusing to take a train further due to ride issues when it turned out half the suspension was missing from the bogie assembly having been incorrectly replaced after maintenance, taking over a train after the driver was nearly decapitated by a failed OHLE structure that collapsed across the line, dealing with a person who killed themselves by setting fire to themselves in a toilet subsequently setting fire to the train in the process, looking after a train load of passengers in a car park including children for over 2 hours at an unmanned station in the middle of nowhere following a fatality after the driver took the train away ECS, dealing with a train and it's passengers after a dead body demolished the corridor connection and trapped the driver in his cab and the list continues, I could go on for hours just with my own exploits let alone anyone else's.

Some of those things required the full training and basic authority of a guard, others didn't but what they did require was the person to be there.

What does matter is the list of events that nearly become big problems but don't because of the second person but these are never quantified. What I do believe is genuine though is the look of horror on the face of a manager of our safety team when single manned trains were mentioned - she just couldn't understand why anyone would want to do it.

The DfT are clearly capable of micromanaging these things and should not be allowed to play the cloak and dagger card.

There's plenty incidents when the full requirements of DOO (Full track circuiting, CSR/GSM-R, etc) have prevented very serious accidents as well (I can think of several). I was careful to talk about full detonator protection, rather than the role of onboard crew, as nobody on the forum is actually for single manning. That's a tip of my hat to train crew, having been involved in DOO in some pretty rural areas at times for years, with lots of involvement with on train incidents (snakes on trains, criminal activity, fare dodging, vandalism, police attendance, and some interesting arrangements where we've entrapped certain people by holding trains in certain areas for the police) all I can say it is manageable. I've even been involved in stuff on guarded trains as a passenger while being staff, alerting guards to lineside issues or binding brakes (twice). Backwards step? Well for customer service and fare dodging and the disabled it definitely is in my view, and maybe a second pair of eyes, and that's where the RMT should be aiming.

 

[313103]

I have been looking through RAIB reports back to 18 October 2015.

There appear to 11 cases of passengers being trapped in doors which they have investigated. Of those 3 involved London Underground (all DOO) one Metro (also DOO) and 7 National Rail of which 5 were DOO. I think there might be another one involving guards but couldnt see it on a quick look.

Of those involving guards 2 have resulted in prosecutions which implies the guards are considered to have done something wrong. In one though the case has yet to receive court so the guard might be innocent.

As far as I know no drivers have been charged which seems to indicate that trap and drag accidents involving drivers are accepted to be a risk, but not for guards.

That is because if they did prosecute a driver for trap and drag incident, it would mean the system is flawed and that is something the companies will not be prepared to accept.

By all means blame the guard they want rid of them anyway after all he/she is a dispensable pawn in this game of chess.

 

[AlterEgo]

That is because if they did prosecute a driver for trap and drag incident, it would mean the system is flawed and that is something the companies will not be prepared to accept.

By all means blame the guard they want rid of them anyway after all he/she is a dispensable pawn in this game of chess.

That would require us to accept the proposition that the Crown Prosecution Service is in cahoots with train companies/RSSB...tin hat time.

 

[Flamingo]

That would require us to accept the proposition that the Crown Prosecution Service is in cahoots with train companies/RSSB...tin hat time.

The Criminal Protection Service are well known for only going after the low hanging fruit (except in exceptional circumstances). If they know that a TOC will mount a vigerous defence of a driver because their policies might be brought under scrutiny, it's too much hassle for an uncertain outcome. But if the vibes are that a token defence is all there will be (or indeed, the TOC will wash their hands of responsibility for an employee), that's a different ball-game...

 

[AlterEgo]

The Criminal Protection Service are well known for only going after the low hanging fruit (except in exceptional circumstances). If they know that a TOC will mount a vigerous defence of a driver because their policies might be brought under scrutiny, it's too much hassle for an uncertain outcome. But if the vibes are that a token defence is all there will be (or indeed, the TOC will wash their hands of responsibility for an employee), that's a different ball-game...

It's not the TOC they have to worry about. It's usually the union which provides the political hitting and legal defence.

In the Martin Zee case, Merseyrail offered full legal assistance I believe. (Won't go into that case but it seems a bizarre prosecution based on the facts currently in the public domain)

 

[313103]

That would require us to accept the proposition that the Crown Prosecution Service is in cahoots with train companies/RSSB...tin hat time.

Whether you accept it or not is irrelevant how do we know this doesnt go on?After all those proponents of DOO are working well within RSSB, so it wouldnt be a surprise to find that the CPS are working in cahoots with train companies and the rssb. No need for the tin hat though, that isnt going to protect anyone.

 

[AlterEgo]

Whether you accept it or not is irrelevant how do we know this doesnt go on?After all those proponents of DOO are working well within RSSB, so it wouldnt be a surprise to find that the CPS are working in cahoots with train companies and the rssb. No need for the tin hat though, that isnt going to protect anyone.

A ridiculous conspiracy theory. Keep drinking the Kool-Aid, brother.

 

[Flamingo]

It's not the TOC they have to worry about. It's usually the union which provides the political hitting and legal defence.

In the Martin Zee case, Merseyrail offered full legal assistance I believe. (Won't go into that case but it seems a bizarre prosecution based on the facts currently in the public domain)

If the TOC/RSSB are offering evidence that the indivdual was following industry guidelines, it makes it a lot harder for the CPS to proceed against the individual. And proceeding against a public utility is a different ballgame, as then it becomes a corporate prosecution, which is going to need a much bigger investment in m'learned friends than a simple GBH/negligence type prosecution...

 

[AlterEgo]

If the TOC/RSSB are offering evidence that the indivdual was following industry guidelines, it makes it a lot harder for the CPS to proceed against the individual. And proceeding against a public utility is a different ballgame, as then it becomes a corporate prosecution, which is going to need a much bigger investment in m'learned friends than a simple GBH/negligence type prosecution...

But Martin Zee allegedly followed company procedure - which is why the prosecution confuses me. Last news was that the hearing had been postponed once more, which perhaps is a signal the case may be dropped in time.

I agree with what you say - certainly true that the CPS goes for the low hanging fruit. A prosecution of a TOC would likely happen by the ORR rather than the CPS because of the very technical nature of any such prosecution.

 

[highdyke]

But Martin Zee allegedly followed company procedure - which is why the prosecution confuses me.

Because following procedure is not necessarily a 'get out a jail free' card, nor is 'he told me so'. It's all to do with guiding minds, which is why corporate manslaughter is devilishly hard to pursue. Can't comment on the latest case, because we don't have all the information and it's subject to a court case.

We all know cover-ups do happen - Hillsborough being the most famous example. The reason I'm not buying it is because of the relatively safe 30 odd year history of DOO compared to the alternative. The trap and drag thing is under review and new door designs are on the way.

If the system really was unsafe we'd be seeing more injuries and deaths, that's the reason these things can be quantified. I'm not naive and have been on the other side of the fence a number of times (often to my detriment) you get a nose for this sort of stuff.

 

[ninja-lewis]

Looking through the archives back 50 years, I've not been able to find one incident that a guard has prevented a second collision by providing full detonator protection.

Was there not a case about 20 years ago where a contributory factor was the guard failing to lay down detonators thus failing to prevent another train running into the derailed train?

 

[highdyke]

Was there not a case about 20 years ago where a contributory factor was the guard failing to lay down detonators thus failing to prevent another train running into the derailed train?

Ais Gil (1995) and some questions over detonator protection at Seer Green (1981). Some accidents there was no time Clapham Junction (1988) or the crew thought their train was protected, Ivergowrie (1979). Prior to RAIB many minor accidents/incidents and a few major ones were not subject to public inquiry or never came to light or there's no public data.

 

[Harbornite]

By and large, both non DOO and DOO services have good safety records. However no one can pretend that the presence of a guard will never result in the odd injury or fatility. I am reminder of that girl who was drunk and died after the guard gave the right away without checking if the girl was leaning against the train. I'm not saying that DOO should be rolled out or not, merely clarifying that both forms of operation are liable to human error.

 

[plymothian]

The GWR dispute looks set to come to a head again after the RMT declared a 28 day "ultimatum deadline" before another strike ballot.

 

[Robertj21a]

The GWR dispute looks set to come to a head again after the RMT declared a 28 day "ultimatum deadline" before another strike ballot.

It's probably just me but I'm completely lost as to which dispute is which nowadays. Can anyone remind me what the dispute is with GWR ?

Thank you.

 

[plymothian]

It's probably just me but I'm completely lost as to which dispute is which nowadays. Can anyone remind me what the dispute is with GWR ?

Thank you.

Threefold in as much as:

1. The expansion of DOO in so far as:
a. The cascade of the class 165/166 Thames Turbos to West of England
b. The class 800/802 SETs (IEPs)/AT300s being DCO and able to run without a guard

2. The loss of the buffet on the 800/802s

3. The loss of in-house maintenance to Hitachi with the closure of TMDs, and the enforced change of location/job on maintenance staff.