Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[AlterEgo]

Oh and some of these have plenty of union badges on themselves and their bags about no to DOO etc

How is this relevant information?

 

[Deepgreen]

It probably due to this being the first proposed extension of DOO since RMT signed their joint declaration with ASLEF against DOO late last year, I think that agreement took away most of the guards incentive to settle for virtually anything other than outright victory , in the belief that if they couldn't win the battle alone the drivers definitely could on their behalf

That may be a factor, although ASLEF do not appear to have been much involved. If the safety element is as important as has been stated, I would have expected ASLEF to have sprung up alongside the RMT to ensure its members were not forced into a role that put them at risk of legal action in the event of an incident. My theory (and it is only that) is that it cannot be a coincidence that the naked aggression shown by Wilkinson has been followed by the current situation.

 

[gtr driver]

It's hard to quantify, however I'd say there are two types of incident where a DOO service is more vulnerable:

1) Someone tried to board as the doors are closing and gets something caught, the driver doesn't notice, and this leads to a dragging incident. (e.g. Huntingdon, Hayes & Harlington).

2) A packed platform and a packed train trying to depart, with people left behind, and someone on the platform gets something caught in the doors and the driver doesn't notice (e.g. Clapham South).

And because on a packed platform where people are blocking the view it can be harder for the driver to rely on the view from mirrors or monitors than that gained from being on the platform. On a straight platform the driver can look back which is better but he can't tell someone twelve cars away to stand clear. Modern trains aren't designed for look back anyway. So it's chance the view or get out and walk back and close each door manually.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That may be a factor, although ASLEF do not appear to have been much involved. If the safety element is as important as has been stated, I would have expected ASLEF to have sprung up alongside the RMT to ensure its members were not forced into a role that put them at risk of legal action in the event of an incident. My theory (and it is only that) is that it cannot be a coincidence that the naked aggression shown by Wilkinson has been followed by the current situation.

Tricky for ASLEF. Existing agreements made with them about the limits of DOO have been somewhat stretched to allow extensions of DOO; and when ASLEF has followed the process of challenging this through to the last resort - ie a ballot for industrial action - successful court action has been taken against them. ASLEF cannot be seen to incite unofficial industrial action - and almost every attempt to challenge current DOO extensions has been interpreted as such. The dispute is officially regarded as with the RMT/guards rather than ASLEF/drivers.

 

[FordFocus]

Look back also creates the risk of a SPAD occurring leaving the station due to the extra workload placed on the driver. So it's either a potential PTI incident or another potential SPAD statistic. Which would the RSSB prefer?

 

[JamesTT]

How is this relevant information?

Why is it relevant that someone who adorns their person and belongings with badges about safety doesn't follow the safety procedures?

 

[Antman]

I bow to your superior experience. Being personally responsible for a hundred safe stops and starts a day in sometimes very challenging circumstances is nothing to being a passenger on a couple of trains is it?

And what's that got to do with anything? The point was about how often these serious or even fatal accidents occur on DOO trains.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's hard to quantify, however I'd say there are two types of incident where a DOO service is more vulnerable:

1) Someone tried to board as the doors are closing and gets something caught, the driver doesn't notice, and this leads to a dragging incident. (e.g. Huntingdon, Hayes & Harlington).

2) A packed platform and a packed train trying to depart, with people left behind, and someone on the platform gets something caught in the doors and the driver doesn't notice (e.g. Clapham South).

I'm not saying that they never happen but they are very rare, although obviously one is one too many, but accidents do also happen when there is a guard doing the dispatching.

 

[Matt Taylor]

I don't doubt it but I have also witnessed a number of guards do not. Oh and some of these have plenty of union badges on themselves and their bags about no to DOO etc

Module SS1 of the Rule Book:

You must then stay at the door controls until the train has passed clear of the
platform.



This was reintroduced after the Liverpool St James tragedy.

 

[Anvil1984]

And what's that got to do with anything? The point was about how often these serious or even fatal accidents occur on DOO trains.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I'm not saying that they never happen but they are very rare, although obviously one is one too many, but accidents do also happen when there is a guard doing the dispatching.

Newcastle was one of those but was due to a) conductor getting flustered and not going through procedure but also B) TOCs cutting down on (or redeploying) platform staff or not wanting to pay other TOCs to use theirs if they only have a small amount of services at that station. Platform 10 is a curved platform where from the normal door position you cannot see the front of the train and as Newcastle is a major station 3 man despatch should be required but it got signed off on health and safety grounds where in reality it's to avoid extra costs

 

[gtr driver]

Newcastle was one of those but was due to a) conductor getting flustered and not going through procedure but also B) TOCs cutting down on (or redeploying) platform staff or not wanting to pay other TOCs to use theirs if they only have a small amount of services at that station. Platform 10 is a curved platform where from the normal door position you cannot see the front of the train and as Newcastle is a major station 3 man despatch should be required but it got signed off on health and safety grounds where in reality it's to avoid extra costs

I fear the Ants and Trolls don't want to listen. Wasting my breath.

 

[Antman]

I fear the Ants and Trolls don't want to listen. Wasting my breath.

A phrase about pots and kettles springs to mind:roll:!

 

[JamesTT]

Module SS1 of the Rule Book:

You must then stay at the door controls until the train has passed clear of the
platform.



This was reintroduced after the Liverpool St James tragedy.

You are absolutely correct but I am sorry to say plenty of guards don't adhere to this rule. It is some what hypocritical for such people to make comments about safety is it not?

 

[Antman]

Newcastle was one of those but was due to a) conductor getting flustered and not going through procedure but also B) TOCs cutting down on (or redeploying) platform staff or not wanting to pay other TOCs to use theirs if they only have a small amount of services at that station. Platform 10 is a curved platform where from the normal door position you cannot see the front of the train and as Newcastle is a major station 3 man despatch should be required but it got signed off on health and safety grounds where in reality it's to avoid extra costs

Yes that's a very good point, makes a nice change from certain others on here who think that they can just shout down anybody who disagrees with them.

 

[AlterEgo]

Why is it relevant that someone who adorns their person and belongings with badges about safety doesn't follow the safety procedures?

I don't understand why wearing a badge would make someone a more or less competent guard, that's all.

The fact that someone supports or opposes DOO or is or isn't in a union does not have any bearing on how good they are at their job.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Module SS1 of the Rule Book:

You must then stay at the door controls until the train has passed clear of the
platform.

This was reintroduced after the Liverpool St James tragedy.

You are absolutely correct but I am sorry to say plenty of guards don't adhere to this rule. It is some what hypocritical for such people to make comments about safety is it not?

The trouble is when the rule was first removed from the Rule Book many TOCs immediately removed the relevant part from their company procedures and "encouraged" their guards to resume ticketing duties the moment their train was rolling. This quickly became the habit for many.

Cue James Street and the, perhaps understandable, knee-jerk reaction to re-instate the rule and some guards found it hard to break the new habit to resume the old one.

In reality once you get to the hours of darkness it becomes a mostly pointless exercise. Given that most of the time the guard won't have an opening window through which they can pop their head for a better view they are staring at a flat sheet of glass. Unless the platform is particularly brightly lit then the "view" is either of the dirt on the outside of the window or a reflection of the guard's face.

The safest way to provide proper surveillance of the PTI adjacent to a departing train is to remove the monitors from the driver's cab and relocate them to the Guard's Operating Panel. Though the guard would still carry out dispatch duties as now using the platform to obtain the best view of their train possible and only referring to the monitors on departure. And the monitors could continue to work as long as the guard feels necessary as opposed to almost immediately cutting out to avoid distracting the driver. Given that the monitors would need to be fitted to multiple GOPs as opposed to just two cabs (per unit) it'll never happen in the current climate as absolute safety now seems to have been deemed unaffordable. But that possibility most certainly exists.

 

[JamesTT]

I don't understand why wearing a badge would make someone a more or less competent guard, that's all.

The fact that someone supports or opposes DOO or is or isn't in a union does not have any bearing on how good they are at their job.

I didn't say the badges or union membership make anyone more or less competent. I just think if you are campaigning about safety you should follow all procedures related to safety.

 

[Carlisle]

The safest way to provide proper surveillance of the PTI adjacent to a departing train is to remove the monitors from the driver's cab and relocate them to the Guard's Operating Panel. Though the guard would still carry out dispatch duties as now using the platform to obtain the best view of their train possible and only referring to the monitors on departure. And the monitors could continue to work as long as the guard feels necessary as opposed to almost immediately cutting out to avoid distracting the driver. Given that the monitors would need to be fitted to multiple GOPs as opposed to just two cabs (per unit) it'll never happen in the current climate as absolute safety now seems to have been deemed unaffordable. But that possibility most certainly exists.

Driver dispatch with platform screens like the Jubilee line would probably be safer still but of course is impossible to justify on cost grounds

 

[FordFocus]

They go off as soon as the train leaves the station as the radio link is lost between the platform and train.

 

[tsr]

They go off as soon as the train leaves the station as the radio link is lost between the platform and train.

I'm pretty sure they each go off individually as the appropriate coach clears the platform. AFAIK drivers are required to watch them for any irregularities until they do so.

EDIT: Seems I was actually being pessimistic, at least concerning certain lines. Here's a video of what you'd see on a Central Line train: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQp7lL4NjTw . It appears to be a genuine video but I've no idea if it was shot with permission or any contrasts this may have with more recent technology, eg. on the S Stock.

 

[Domh245]

I'm pretty sure they each go off individually as the appropriate coach clears the platform. AFAIK drivers are required to watch them for any irregularities until they do so.

EDIT: Seems I was actually being pessimistic, at least concerning certain lines. Here's a video of what you'd see on a Central Line train: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQp7lL4NjTw . It appears to be a genuine video but I've no idea if it was shot with permission or any contrasts this may have with more recent technology, eg. on the S Stock.

According to squarewheels, the monitors stay on until the train has fully left the platform.

The twin large monitors in front of the driver provide views of station platforms both during station-stops and until the train has fully departed the platform.

 

[gtr driver]

A phrase about pots and kettles springs to mind:roll:!

Not at all. When an armchair pundit keeps making dubious ill informed claims - such as a bus being the same as a train, a bit of board being the answer to sunlight bleaching out DOO cameras, or stating that his use of trains as a passenger means he knows about the reality of DOO better than a driver - then I consider it reasonable to point out why you are wrong. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of experience.

 

[Antman]

Not at all. When an armchair pundit keeps making dubious ill informed claims - such as a bus being the same as a train, a bit of board being the answer to sunlight bleaching out DOO cameras, or stating that his use of trains as a passenger means he knows about the reality of DOO better than a driver - then I consider it reasonable to point out why you are wrong. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of experience.

An armchair pundit? Says it all really:roll:!

Of course you still haven't explained these people who are apparently being killed and seriously injured because of DOO!

 

[FordFocus]

I'm pretty sure they each go off individually as the appropriate coach clears the platform. AFAIK drivers are required to watch them for any irregularities until they do so.

EDIT: Seems I was actually being pessimistic, at least concerning certain lines. Here's a video of what you'd see on a Central Line train: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQp7lL4NjTw . It appears to be a genuine video but I've no idea if it was shot with permission or any contrasts this may have with more recent technology, eg. on the S Stock.

Thanks for that

 

[SPADTrap]

An armchair pundit? Says it all really:roll:!

Of course you still haven't explained these people who are apparently being killed and seriously injured because of DOO!

What do you need explaining about the people being killed and injured?

 

[FordFocus]

Of course you still haven't explained these people who are apparently being killed and seriously injured because of DOO!

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/raib-report-032016-serious-accident-at-west-wickham-station

At around 11:35 hrs on 10 April 2015, a passenger was dragged along the platform at West Wickham station, south London, when the 11:00 hrs Southeastern service from London Cannon Street to Hayes (Kent) departed while her backpack strap was trapped in the doors of the train. As it moved off, she fell onto the platform and then through the gap between the platform and train, suffering life-changing injuries.

 

[Antman]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/raib-report-032016-serious-accident-at-west-wickham-station

At around 11:35 hrs on 10 April 2015, a passenger was dragged along the platform at West Wickham station, south London, when the 11:00 hrs Southeastern service from London Cannon Street to Hayes (Kent) departed while her backpack strap was trapped in the doors of the train. As it moved off, she fell onto the platform and then through the gap between the platform and train, suffering life-changing injuries.

Yes that's terrible but it's one isolated incident and similar things have happened when a guard has been present.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What do you need explaining about the people being killed and injured?

What was the point of posting that?

 

[wingsoveryorks]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/raib-report-032016-serious-accident-at-west-wickham-station

At around 11:35 hrs on 10 April 2015, a passenger was dragged along the platform at West Wickham station, south London, when the 11:00 hrs Southeastern service from London Cannon Street to Hayes (Kent) departed while her backpack strap was trapped in the doors of the train. As it moved off, she fell onto the platform and then through the gap between the platform and train, suffering life-changing injuries.

The direction of this thread is a whole big white elephant. You have to compare the percentage of DOO to conductor operated to get a valid picture.

Also passenger behaviour comes into play. Strathclyde for example where DOO has been in operation for years, passengers seem to know the score and don't tend to jump in at the last minute. If Southern go DOO, it'll just be a matter of time before somebody thinking the conductor will see them, tries it to their cost.

 

[plymothian]

I'm pretty sure they each go off individually as the appropriate coach clears the platform. AFAIK drivers are required to watch them for any irregularities until they do so.

EDIT: Seems I was actually being pessimistic, at least concerning certain lines. Here's a video of what you'd see on a Central Line train: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQp7lL4NjTw . It appears to be a genuine video but I've no idea if it was shot with permission or any contrasts this may have with more recent technology, eg. on the S Stock.

But then again a Central line driver is not actually driving, a computer is.

 

[Chrisgr31]

I'm not saying that they never happen but they are very rare, although obviously one is one too many, but accidents do also happen when there is a guard doing the dispatching.

If I recall when I looked at the RAIB reports since 2010 there were 11 reports on trap and drag involving onboard dispatch of those 9 were DOO and 2 guards although a number of the DOO involved the tube. I didn't count those were there platform staff doing dispatch, probably should have they all involved DOO trains I think.

Of the 2 involving guards one is well known and the guard is in prison for not doing his job properly (even though there might be reasons for that), the other one is awaiting trail for unknown reasons.

It seems there are significantly less incidents involving guards, and in anumber of the RAIB reports they stated that the derivers involved in the DOO incidents should have seen the trapped person and didn't. One of the suggestions for this was that drivers may tend in certain circumstances see what they want to see (clear doors) rather than what is there.

Now there are very few cases compared to the number of trains so an individual passengers chances of being involved are very low, but potentially still too many. We also dont know how many incidents are not investigated

 

[gtr driver]

If I recall when I looked at the RAIB reports since 2010 there were 11 reports on trap and drag involving onboard dispatch of those 9 were DOO and 2 guards although a number of the DOO involved the tube. I didn't count those were there platform staff doing dispatch, probably should have they all involved DOO trains I think.

Of the 2 involving guards one is well known and the guard is in prison for not doing his job properly (even though there might be reasons for that), the other one is awaiting trail for unknown reasons.

It seems there are significantly less incidents involving guards, and in anumber of the RAIB reports they stated that the derivers involved in the DOO incidents should have seen the trapped person and didn't. One of the suggestions for this was that drivers may tend in certain circumstances see what they want to see (clear doors) rather than what is there.

Now there are very few cases compared to the number of trains so an individual passengers chances of being involved are very low, but potentially still too many. We also dont know how many incidents are not investigated

Exactly Chrisg31. When something does happen, it tends to be framed in terms of the human actors making a mistake rather than the method they are obliged to use having disadvantages. Therefore plenty of daily DOO events are not investigated because the whole system is assumed to be working and cannot be reported in those terms.

As myself and several others keep trying to point out to Antman, our FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE of DOO tells us that the chances of something developing with the view of the doors that the driver has is much higher. I'd throw this open to other DOO drivers and suggest that at least once a day I encounter an incident that concerns me on the platform train interface. Things are often on a knife edge and could go either way. An accident is usually the final event in a chain of mistakes. We are currently raising the risk of that final mistake, by relying too much on one person, using a method that has issues that are being ignored, and applying it to more trains, locations and times of the day than ever before.

For example, on a curved staffless platform, if the platform monitors have packed up, the driver has to close the doors manually. But he will not have a view of the whole train now. So even though he has seen each door shut individually, he has no guarantee that someone isn't hanging off a coach; and given the increasingly unhappy things we hear about the interlock light, that someone doesn't have their hand trapped between two doors and is about to be dragged to their death as the train moves. But the DOO working system is not deemed to be at fault here; it's just seen as a temporary issue with one station. Yet suddenly the odds of something occurring are much higher without that second person. If we even just had them during the peaks, the risk would be much reduced.

And when the driver reports the problem, he will be offered a Hobson's Choice - he will told to dispatch from the platform if he deems it safe ie the onus is now on him doubly. He could say no, I'm not opening the doors and moving off without calling as that is the safest course of action now; or I'm taking the train out of service. The former will possibly lead to danger due to passengers eggressing doors or grabbing at the train as it goes. And accusations of a fail to call being on his record. The latter will lead to aggro from passengers as he has to detrain them, and an even less safe situation with with them all on the platform as he moves off without a view of the train or a second person to dispatch him.

This isn't me trying to disagree with someone for the sake of it; this is me using what I've experienced to make a point.

 

[tsr]

But then again a Central line driver is not actually driving, a computer is.

I am of the opinion that driver dispatch is / would be much safer if it is only carried out on routes where the driver is principally dispatching and not manually driving the train. In addition I am only really comfortable with it if the dispatch monitors only cease functioning after the train has left the platform. As we've already demonstrated, this happens on many Tube lines - it certainly does not happen on NR network DOO(P) routes.

I am still not comfortable with there being no second safety-critical person rostered on mainline trains, and that includes existing TL & GN routes, but it must be recognised that there are compromises already in place with regards to some ways used by Southern conductors to dispatch trains, and a Tube-style system would probably be no worse from the point of view of being compared to saloon dispatch and checking the PTI as the train leaves the station. Alas, it basically probably couldn't be implemented without ATO being introduced across the whole of the central South of England, as otherwise you'd end up distracting drivers. So...!

For example, on a curved staffless platform, if the platform monitors have packed up, the driver has to close the doors manually. But he will not have a view of the whole train now. So even though he has seen each door shut individually, he has no guarantee that someone isn't hanging off a coach; and given the increasingly unhappy things we hear about the interlock light, that someone doesn't have their hand trapped between two doors and is about to be dragged to their death as the train moves. But the DOO working system is not deemed to be at fault here; it's just seen as a temporary issue with one station. Yet suddenly the odds of something occurring are much higher without that second person. If we even just had them during the peaks, the risk would be much reduced.

And when the driver reports the problem, he will be offered a Hobson's Choice - he will told to dispatch from the platform if he deems it safe ie the onus is now on him doubly. He could say no, I'm not opening the doors and moving off without calling as that is the safest course of action now; or I'm taking the train out of service. The former will possibly lead to danger due to passengers eggressing doors or grabbing at the train as it goes. And accusations of a fail to call being on his record. The latter will lead to aggro from passengers as he has to detrain them, and an even less safe situation with with them all on the platform as he moves off without a view of the train or a second person to dispatch him.

As it stands there is a third choice: that you wait until dispatch staff become available and refuse to leave until they are. It will be a deeply unpopular move with the signaller, control and so on; but if it is not safe to leave, then you don't leave. The same applies for any unavailable equipment which is vital, any permission to pass a signal which seems too vague, etc. etc.

I have actually got experience of this. I have been shouted at down a mobile, on a cab-to-cab phone and by platform staff huffing and puffing at me. I even had a signaller come out of a box once at 1am and shout their lungs out from 200 yards away about how I was delaying some random set of empties from nowhere to nowhere. I have dispatched trains in a variety of challenging circumstances from many of Britain's very busiest stations. Sometimes I have had to stop dispatch for 5-10 minutes to make sure the situation is safe. Occasionally more - though fortunately it's rarely carried on longer than that before a problem is resolved (I think the unfortunate record goes to a faux pas at [London terminus] which took 28 minutes to sort out). I would always suggest, though, that if one starts making assumptions or starts needing to have unduly high expectations about how the public will behave, or if you can't see clearly from any position, or if you think someone could possibly get injured and killed, it's not worth your while to go any further. You doubtless have heard this all before and I can tell you've had to make awkward decisions to do with dispatch. I can only speak for myself when I say that I'm now taking a moral and technical hard line with this, but I think it's the right thing to do. If it saves one person from an untimely demise then it's more than worth it, in my book.