W Driver Only Operated Trains (DOO) discussion

[CC 72100]

Paris, and some other Metro systems, run fully automated, unattended, trains.

On 2 out of 14 lines.

on lines 1 + 14, the automated ones, they are entirely enclosed with platform edge doors at all stations. They are also mainly at low speed, especially on the former, so can be thought of as an underground DLR.

A la DLR, they also contain panels at the front which allow the train to be manually driven if need be.

 

[8J]

New York subway system has a guard in the centre of the train controlling the doors...

 

[FordFocus]

Should I take that as a no then? In which case, what's the problem?

You've still avoided the original question I asked. Are you sure your not running for this election!

I'll go first seen as this could go around in circles with your deliberate avoidance

The Strathclyde Manning Arrangement is an agreement made that no train will run without a second person on board that's trained in safety arrangements. Over the years I'm reliably told that the training package has been watered down with minimal rule book knowledge and so that the TEs lack real operational experience for when it does go wrong. No offense obviously to anyone who works the Scotrail.

During the Airdrie dispute it was brought to light that First Group had been running trains without TEs due to relying on overtime and running with minimal staff. So no cover for sickness, annual leave. This broke the agreement. If they were guards, the trains wouldn't have moved and the company would never have let staffing arrangements so low in numbers for it to happen in the first place. Yes, I know we can say a train without a second person is better than no train but the point is that the company wouldn't have let numbers drop so low as Scottish Government would have stepped in quite sharply!

So let's bring this back to FGW a minute. They say trains can run without a TM in rare circumstances. I can honestly see that been the start of what happened above where trains will run regularly without TMs .

So that's what I've got against that model

Southeastern wanted DOO originally but couldn't satisfy the regulations whatever they were. Like I explained briefly before. There is more to the platform than you can see through a body side camera.

 

[Carlisle]

They've had a good record of late but they are also a much smaller network than here. I do have personal worries about the safety of the "mini-CTC" lines (80mph+ single lines with no cab signalling or any form of train stop equipment should a SPAD occur?), but then I guess that's an improvement over running DOO trains over token operated single lines, which used to be common. I can also remember commuting on push-pull sets with a loco and 6 mk3s. No way of contacting the driver or for him to get to the passengers on the train, but they were still completely DOO on suburban routes.

Meanwhile, stations like Nenagh (2/3, mostly empty trains per day) are still staffed?!

Most of the intercity services do run with a 2nd member of train crew on board though, even though door operation is done by the driver.

Cheers that's some very interesting info , I have only travelled on small parts of the Irish network around Cork, Dublin and some in NI, I'm really surprised to hear it was permissible to run a push-pull set as a DOO train, can certainly not see that happening here

 

[LowLevel]

IE was/is properly broke (and as previously mentioned still has some very odd staffing issues) - I should imagine their cost vs safety vs customer service vs stop running trains agenda is much different to here.

As for experience - I spend anywhere between 30 and 60 hours a week working on the railway - plus whatever time I spend in my leisure time. I know what I see in my area, I know pretty well how my colleagues work, and I know the number of bad apples is fairly minimal because the company pushes a strong presence and customer service agenda.

Assuming you still live and work in Yorkshire, Yorkie, I can understand Monty's irritation when referring to SWT's guards in that you can't exactly be spending much time per day or per week travelling on board their trains to form a particularly authoritative opinion.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Cheers that's some very interesting info , I have only travelled on small parts of the Irish network around Cork, Dublin and some in NI, I'm really surprised to hear it was permissible to run a push-pull set as a DOO train, can certainly not see that happening here

Common in Switzerland as well. Though Switzerland is not known for rail safety as such; some of their procedures (such as the non-DOO dispatch procedure) are rather lacking.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But do passengers want a member of staff constantly bugging them in the train. What I want from a guard, tm or conductor on a train is for them to do a full ticket check (which currently most do) and to be able to help if needed (which from experience they currently do) both whilst safely operating the doors... so why would people want DOO to be introduced? This is a cost saving measure without a shadow of doubt...

You answered your own question - by far the biggest "bad" perception of the railway is that it is too expensive to use it.

I want to see driver-operated doors as it will make the guard's job more efficient (as they don't have to go and do the doors at each stop between doing other duties), or at the very least driver-released doors as on the Voyagers, and it also quite noticeably allows for quicker door opening on arrival, quicker departure and is in some ways safer[1] than guard dispatch where the guard is dispatching from a passenger door without a droplight, as the driver can check the platform right up to releasing the brakes and applying power. (Though granted a guard working from a cab with a droplight is safer than both).

[1] Actually, if we keep the guard on board, how about them using a baton to signal "time to go" at stations without platform staff, allowing them to retain control of when the train goes and to provide an extra check, but then once given the driver uses his DOO monitors to secondarily be sure it's clear? Double safety?

This is the beginning of the destruction of the railways as we know it...

DOO has disadvantages, but while I can understand people being concerned for their jobs, that statement is nonsense. There are loads of DOO services in the UK already. In Germany and Switzerland, rural DOO is the usual. Those services are not "destroyed".

It is entirely valid to argue against DOO on a few grounds - customer service, safety in an accident, keeping jobs etc - but your statement is way over the top. It won't lead to the destruction of the railways any more than closing ticket offices did, or destaffing platforms, or TVMs, or online ticket purchase, or not double-manning cabs, or any other labour-reducing change.

Indeed, if DOO had been viable and mooted at the time, might it have potentially saved a few branch lines, which could be operated by one person only rather than two on the train and one at each station, when it came to Beeching cut time? After all, buses are DOO, and that's one of the things that makes them cheaper...

 

[Fincra5]

There will always be at least one staff member on a train. The DLR is, when everything runs smoothly, completely automated, but there is still a member of staff on board.

I am sorry you lost your job, and of course that is going to be upsetting, and no-one wants to see that happen. Fortunately for FGW staff, FGW are not proposing making any staff redundant and are going to be employing additional staff, not less.

Ah yes but the member of staff on there is a mix between a guard/ driver... they do the doors, usually from a vestibule (Where they have the best line of sight) and when driving they use the mirrors. But comparing a slow speed, close urban metro network is hardly the same as IC stuff...

As for SWT metro guards... they have panels in the cabs, not sure where else, so how do you expect them to visible?

Guards role isn't just revenue, revenue, revenue... thats a Ticket Examiners or RPO's Job.

As some are mentioning Switzerland.. I got on a local train to Basel, yes that was DOO but then it also has automatic ramps that extend out for disabled passengers, however the IC service from Basel to Zurich did have a guard.

 

[northwichcat]

And with the Northern ITT stating AT LEAST 50% of services to be DOO by 2020, who will be next?

No it doesn't. It specifically states Driver Controlled Operation, not Driver Only Operation. The idea is there will be a second person on board who will responsible for revenue and customer service without the need for them to constantly having to do the doors on frequent stop services.

As I posted earlier on:

in preparing the train crew diagram relating to such Passenger Service plan for an additional Franchise Employee (that is, in addition to the driver) to be present on such Passenger Service for the purposes of customer service and/or revenue control

 

[Fincra5]

No it doesn't. It specifically states Driver Controlled Operation, not Driver Only Operation. The idea is there will be a second person on board who will responsible for revenue and customer service without the need for them to constantly having to do the doors on frequent stop services.

As I posted earlier on:

As long as they don't abuse the system of "If there is no TM immediately available" then it would run DOO until a TM was there.

Having a control panel at every door also would mean the guard could be with the passengers, maybe not for 1 minute whilst they dispatch. Maybe 2 with a PA but i'm sure the passengers can survive.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As long as they don't abuse the system of "If there is no TM immediately available" then it would run DOO until a TM was there.

Having a control panel at every door also would mean the guard could be with the passengers, maybe not for 1 minute whilst they dispatch. Maybe 2 with a PA but i'm sure the passengers can survive.

But they still have to push past a crowd of passengers to get to the panel. (From observation on LM). It's also quite disruptive on a transaction when you have to interrupt it every 2 minutes, particularly if a passenger insists, as one really should, that their credit card does not leave their sight.

That said, driver *released* doors would solve that. Then the guard can make his way to the door and dispatch when the transaction is completed and the crowds have cleared off the train. I personally believe driver *released* doors should be implemented on all UK trains regardless of whether we go any further than that on some services. Though in some locations there would have to be an improvement to SDO using balises or similar, as UDS wouldn't cut it.

 

[Fincra5]

But they still have to push past a crowd of passengers to get to the panel. (From observation on LM). It's also quite disruptive on a transaction when you have to interrupt it every 2 minutes, particularly if a passenger insists, as one really should, that their credit card does not leave their sight.

That said, driver *released* doors would solve that. Then the guard can make his way to the door and dispatch when the transaction is completed and the crowds have cleared off the train. I personally believe driver *released* doors should be implemented on all UK trains regardless of whether we go any further than that on some services. Though in some locations there would have to be an improvement to SDO using balises or similar, as UDS wouldn't cut it.

Well thats what happens down here on the SouthEast/ South Central. That system works fine but of course its not fool proof, there's a large amount of short stops, with door releases (by driver).

As to your point about getting their way to the panel, yes people might be in the way but the time between stops on IC routes tends to be a while.

 

[northwichcat]

Having a control panel at every door also would mean the guard could be with the passengers, maybe not for 1 minute whilst they dispatch. Maybe 2 with a PA but i'm sure the passengers can survive.

One of the main concerns with Northern is ensuring everyone has a ticket. It's impossible to put RPIs or barriers at every station. 1-2 extra minutes on revenue duties per station would make a big difference to ticket-less travel on some routes without increasing costs. In fact doing it could mean a reduction in agency staff doing RPI duties at stations, something the RMT have been demanding.

One of the reasons Northern contract Revenue Protection at stations out to STM Security is the franchise agreement specifies a limit that can be spent on staff salaries. However, the agreement allows a contract to STM Security (who employ staff on the minimum wage) as the amount of revenue taken by STM Security is around double what they pay STM Security for the revenue protection contract meaning DfT are happy.

The RMT wouldn't want trains to have a contracted member of revenue staff on board alongside the conductor, they also don't want more contracted RPIs at stations - they want rail employees who they can represent.

It seems giving door control duties over to the driver but keeping Northern Rail conductors on board for other duties would be the best compromise.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As to your point about getting their way to the panel, yes people might be in the way but the time between stops on IC routes tends to be a while.

That much is true, but on IC routes a few minutes before arrival you tend to find there is an impenetrable queue of luggage and people into the vestibules and it's hard for a guard to get anywhere near the panel until they have all alighted.

Drive released doors might be expensive on LHCS which would I guess be an exception (though DB has modified their LHCS for driver-controlled doors so it's possible). But I see no reason it shouldn't be implemented on all units in some form.

 

[ainsworth74]

How does it work on DB ICE class trains? Full driver/guard? Or some implementation of Driver Controlled Operation?

 

[Bletchleyite]

How does it work on DB ICE class trains? Full driver/guard? Or some implementation of Driver Controlled Operation?

I don't know, I'm afraid. But it used to be the case (and still is in Switzerland) that hauled stock (e.g. ICs) just had auto-closers (operated by the guard using his key, that simply close all doors and hold them closed for around 10 seconds, then a door blocking system that disconnects the internal handles using a solenoid (with the outside ones remaining active) kicks in above 5km/h.

I believe the hauled stock was modified so the closure pressure stays in place longer and the driver has to release it - but it releases on both sides. This modification was to stop people opening doors when the train stops outside stations, though DB drivers in the past were well used to crawling up to signals at 6km/h to avoid, for as long as possible, a door release.

 

[FordFocus]

With this 'Driver Controlled Operation' how does this help prevent stop-shorts and wrong side door releases? At least with a guard, they physically open their door on the platform check the entire train is accommodated and then release the door. Max 5 seconds?

 

[Stompehh]

With this 'Driver Controlled Operation' how does this help prevent stop-shorts and wrong side door releases? At least with a guard, they physically open their door on the platform check the entire train is accommodated and then release the door. Max 5 seconds?

As previously mentioned, the SETs will have systems in place to prevent door release on the wrong side or at the wrong location.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With this 'Driver Controlled Operation' how does this help prevent stop-shorts and wrong side door releases? At least with a guard, they physically open their door on the platform check the entire train is accommodated and then release the door. Max 5 seconds?

Take Merseyrail from Ormskirk to Liverpool. Ten intermediate stops excluding termini.

Old procedure: guard operates from back cab, no interlock on guard's door. Doors released immediately the train stops (sometimes, historically, a little bit before). To close doors, guard presses button, doors close immediately, guard gives 2 bells, train departs, guard watches train out of platform with local door open and closes at leisure.

Newer procedure: add hustle alarms for about 3 seconds, and guard must close local door before giving 2 bells. Together these add about 6-7 seconds to the departure procedure, and opening the local door, stepping out then releasing a further, maybe, 2 seconds. So you're up to maybe 8-9 seconds extra per stop.

The end to end time for the line was, for years, with acceptable punctuality and reliability, 28 minutes. 9 seconds x 10 stops = 90 seconds - a minute and a half. When the new procedure was introduced, the trains started running late - and the upshot of that was a need to change the timetable and increase the running time to 30 minutes. While driver-controlled doors would actually be quicker than even the original procedure (no 2-3 seconds of "ding ding, ding ding") and so allow it to return to 28 minutes.

It all makes a difference.

 

[craigybagel]

Take Merseyrail from Ormskirk to Liverpool. Ten intermediate stops excluding termini.

Old procedure: guard operates from back cab, no interlock on guard's door. Doors released immediately the train stops (sometimes, historically, a little bit before). To close doors, guard presses button, doors close immediately, guard gives 2 bells, train departs, guard watches train out of platform with local door open and closes at leisure.

Newer procedure: add hustle alarms for about 3 seconds, and guard must close local door before giving 2 bells. Together these add about 6-7 seconds to the departure procedure, and opening the local door, stepping out then releasing a further, maybe, 2 seconds. So you're up to maybe 8-9 seconds extra per stop.

The end to end time for the line was, for years, with acceptable punctuality and reliability, 28 minutes. 9 seconds x 10 stops = 90 seconds - a minute and a half. When the new procedure was introduced, the trains started running late - and the upshot of that was a need to change the timetable and increase the running time to 30 minutes. While driver-controlled doors would actually be quicker than even the original procedure (no 2-3 seconds of "ding ding, ding ding") and so allow it to return to 28 minutes.

It all makes a difference.

All very well, but what is the difference going to be on the FGW long distance services that this thread is about?

 

[muz379]

But they still have to push past a crowd of passengers to get to the panel. (From observation on LM). It's also quite disruptive on a transaction when you have to interrupt it every 2 minutes, particularly if a passenger insists, as one really should, that their credit card does not leave their sight.

Its true you also might have to push past passengers but my current experience is that passengers are more than willing to move for you to open the doors . But in that time you would be dispatching the train you wont be selling any tickets . If you are stood in the middle of the aisle trying to sell a ticket as the train is arriving or stood in a station you are just going to be in the way of people getting on and off .

I think driver released doors could certainly offer some assistance but would come at a cost , but IMO it should not be considered until there is reliable technology to doors being released if there has been a stop short .

One of the main concerns with Northern is ensuring everyone has a ticket. It's impossible to put RPIs or barriers at every station. 1-2 extra minutes on revenue duties per station would make a big difference to ticket-less travel on some routes without increasing costs. In fact doing it could mean a reduction in agency staff doing RPI duties at stations, something the RMT have been demanding.

One of the reasons Northern contract Revenue Protection at stations out to STM Security is the franchise agreement specifies a limit that can be spent on staff salaries. However, the agreement allows a contract to STM Security (who employ staff on the minimum wage) as the amount of revenue taken by STM Security is around double what they pay STM Security for the revenue protection contract meaning DfT are happy.

The RMT wouldn't want trains to have a contracted member of revenue staff on board alongside the conductor, they also don't want more contracted RPIs at stations - they want rail employees who they can represent.
It seems giving door control duties over to the driver but keeping Northern Rail conductors on board for other duties would be the best compromise.

That 1-2 extra minutes of ticket selling time could be achieved by the installation of more door control panels as I said above you aren't going to be selling any tickets when the train is in or . and in fact it could help in catch out persistent fare evaders who make short journeys , or board the train right at the front in the hopes a guard wont make it down to them .

Pushing forward with a system of driver controlled trains where the drivers release the doors is going to come at a cost though . assuming the same conditions are offered at northern as are being at FGW with no compulsory redundancies and staff members retaining pay and conditions you are going to be paying the conductor the same as they are already being paid to do less work and you are going to be paying the driver what they already are being paid + extra for door duties . and you are going to be paying for even more dispatchers . So doing it the way the DFT wants it done is likely to come with an increase in operating cost

I dont think the increase in contracted out revenue staff is really in anybodies interests apart from the owners of STM and Northern's shareholders . Its certainly not good for customers its obvious someone on a zero hours minimum wage job is not going to provide the same level of customer service ,

Take Merseyrail from Ormskirk to Liverpool. Ten intermediate stops excluding termini.

Old procedure: guard operates from back cab, no interlock on guard's door. Doors released immediately the train stops (sometimes, historically, a little bit before). To close doors, guard presses button, doors close immediately, guard gives 2 bells, train departs, guard watches train out of platform with local door open and closes at leisure.

Newer procedure: add hustle alarms for about 3 seconds, and guard must close local door before giving 2 bells. Together these add about 6-7 seconds to the departure procedure, and opening the local door, stepping out then releasing a further, maybe, 2 seconds. So you're up to maybe 8-9 seconds extra per stop.

The end to end time for the line was, for years, with acceptable punctuality and reliability, 28 minutes. 9 seconds x 10 stops = 90 seconds - a minute and a half. When the new procedure was introduced, the trains started running late - and the upshot of that was a need to change the timetable and increase the running time to 30 minutes. While driver-controlled doors would actually be quicker than even the original procedure (no 2-3 seconds of "ding ding, ding ding") and so allow it to return to 28 minutes.

It all makes a difference.

Not sure if you are being serious or not .

There is a good reason we have a hustle alarm , and there is a good reason the local door must be cloesd before the trains moves .

Do you really think driver controlled doors are going to be any quicker when there is nobody there to shout down the platform for passengers to use all available doors , and nobody there to make sure that buggies and bikes are loaded at the correct door so passengers can get on and off quickly at stations .There wont be anybody there to tell passengers to push the button to open the doors . as for Friday and Saturday nights how are you going to save time with driver controlled doors when some idiot comes and holds the doors open for his mates who are still in the toilet or still outside the station .

Drivers controlling the doors will not lead to trains running any quicker , the 2-3 seconds you wont be having ding ding-ding ding will be consumed by the driver checking he has not stopped short , or setting the DRA or taking his mind off the road ahead and starting to think about the platform behind him .

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not sure if you are being serious or not .

Completely serious. Though I accept what someone else has said about it being less of an issue for IC - though as the topic strayed onto Northern it's definitely relevant to them.

There is a good reason we have a hustle alarm , and there is a good reason the local door must be cloesd before the trains moves .

I know these features are safety features - though most of Europe disagrees on the local door issue - it is totally normal to watch the train out of the platform from the local door. Even Eurostar used to do this, they may still do. Insisting the local door is closed before "ding ding" is of course safer for the staff (and if the door would be out of gauge, for the door ) but is less safe for those on the platform, as nobody is watching the train out of the platform to stop it if there is an issue.

Do you really think driver controlled doors are going to be any quicker when there is nobody there to shout down the platform for passengers to use all available doors

I must admit a feature common to European metro trains, particularly in Germany, is an outside speaker on the train. I think that would be a useful addition to any DOO train when compared to a guard standing 8 coaches away yelling something you can't hear. Zurueckbleiben, bitte!

and nobody there to make sure that buggies and bikes are loaded at the correct door so passengers can get on and off quickly at stations

IME those get put on in the wrong place whether there is a guard there or not. Informing people of where to stand on the PIS (like VT have started doing with their numbered platform zones, more granular than the colour zones were) is a good idea, as are things like this:

https://rachel122333.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/bicycles-on-trains-copenhagen.jpg

- make it glaringly obvious!

There wont be anybody there to tell passengers to push the button to open the doors

There is that one.

as for Friday and Saturday nights how are you going to save time with driver controlled doors when some idiot comes and holds the doors open for his mates who are still in the toilet or still outside the station .

Late night alcoholics' expresses are always going to run late, whether DOO or not. And to be honest while I don't generally advocate use of "rent-a-thug" security guards, that kind of service is the one where two or three of those would probably be a whole lot more use than one guard.

Drivers controlling the doors will not lead to trains running any quicker , the 2-3 seconds you wont be having ding ding-ding ding will be consumed by the driver checking he has not stopped short , or setting the DRA or taking his mind off the road ahead and starting to think about the platform behind him .

Now go and travel on some DOO services and observe that this statement is false. The doors are released on arrival, and the wheels start turning on departure, noticeably more quickly than with guard operation.

 

[muz379]

I must admit a feature common to European metro trains, particularly in Germany, is an outside speaker on the train. I think that would be a useful addition to any DOO train when compared to a guard standing 8 coaches away yelling something you can't hear. Zurueckbleiben, bitte!

That is why guards carry a whistle that can be heard from 8 coaches away and very clearly means the train is going to be going soon so hurry up and get on .

And how many people listen to announcements that come out of speakers , passengers certainly dont do it on trains , the number of time dispatchers have help me at stations because there has been a platform alteration and the passengers haven't listened so are running round like headless chicken

IME those get put on in the wrong place whether there is a guard there or not. Informing people of where to stand on the PIS (like VT have started doing with their numbered platform zones, more granular than the colour zones were) is a good idea, as are things like this:

https://rachel122333.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/bicycles-on-trains-copenhagen.jpg

- make it glaringly obvious!

I do agree with making it glaringly obvious as in that example .

As for bikes getting put on the wrong place if there is a guard that's another example of guards not doing their job properly and isnt IMO an argument to change the system its to make the system as it currently is work properly .

Now go and travel on some DOO services and observe that this statement is false. The doors are released on arrival, and the wheels start turning on departure, noticeably more quickly than with guard operation.

assuming you can get all of the passengers on and off in that time

You are comparing apples with oranges though .
In northern land the biggest problem is that there is no uniform stock deployment so passengers dont know where to stand on the platform , dont know where they should wait if they have a buggy etc because Monday the 08:21 to work might be a 156 but then on Tuesday it is a 150 and then on Wednesday they have a 156 again and then on Thursday they get a 142 .

Plus very many of our diagrams have no time at stations whatsoever so you are expected to arrive at a station at 08:21 and your departure time is also 08:21 . Even with the driver completely controlling the doors and the passengers behaving perfectly knowing where to wait and not bunching round one door the diagram would not be workable .

 

[Greenback]

Please keep this thread relevant to the title and confine the discussion to FGW DOO. Thanks!

 

[notadriver]

At the moment conductor guards are in charge of the trains they work. If there was any change to their job role, would that mean they would no longer be in charge even if they had to be on board every train in service like the on board managers of southeastern ?

 

[me123]

With this 'Driver Controlled Operation' how does this help prevent stop-shorts and wrong side door releases? At least with a guard, they physically open their door on the platform check the entire train is accommodated and then release the door. Max 5 seconds?

I've already mentioned the "issue" of wrong side door releases, which really assumes that people are morons. The driver has just driven along the full length of the platform and has, hopefully, been aware of the platform as they drive past it. Most train drivers have a memory greater than that of a goldfish, and should remember where the platform is.

But memory isn't even important here. I am no expert, but surely the procedure will be quite clear - the driver should stop and secure the train. Then, (s)he should check that the train is aligned with the platform by using the cameras or mirrors provided. Only when (s)he is satisfied that it is safe to do so can (s)he open the doors. Should they adhere to this, issues such as wrong side door openings and stop-shorts should be no more common than with a guard. If they don't adhere to this procedure, then (like a guard who made the same mistake) they would be negligent in their duty.

Besides, even if the driver did open the doors on the wrong side, us passengers aren't going to simply going to open them walk onto the other track like Lemmings.

 

[yorkie]

As for SWT metro guards... they have panels in the cabs, not sure where else, so how do you expect them to visible?

I think that's the point - I don't! I am not in any way criticising the staff.

Guards role isn't just revenue, revenue, revenue... thats a Ticket Examiners or RPO's Job

Indeed.

...Drivers controlling the doors will not lead to trains running any quicker ...

We will have to agree to disagree on that one.

 

[plymothian]

Some drivers don't want to work without a competent guard,
other drivers don't care as long as they have an increase in pay.

So with drivers' wage increase (off set by the eventual out come of the guards' job degradation) and guards' competency maintained (less whatever will be deaned no longer safety critical), DOO is coming and there's nothing that will stop it.

 

[cjmillsnun]

The operations director for fgw has sent out a communication to all fgw staff stating that there will still be a train manager on every service, and customer host on every service over an hour, and that pay and t & c's for on board staff will not change.so there's no need to worry about pay really.

For now.

 

[FordFocus]

I've already mentioned the "issue" of wrong side door releases, which really assumes that people are morons. The driver has just driven along the full length of the platform and has, hopefully, been aware of the platform as they drive past it. Most train drivers have a memory greater than that of a goldfish, and should remember where the platform is.

But memory isn't even important here. I am no expert, but surely the procedure will be quite clear - the driver should stop and secure the train. Then, (s)he should check that the train is aligned with the platform by using the cameras or mirrors provided. Only when (s)he is satisfied that it is safe to do so can (s)he open the doors. Should they adhere to this, issues such as wrong side door openings and stop-shorts should be no more common than with a guard. If they don't adhere to this procedure, then (like a guard who made the same mistake) they would be negligent in their duty.

Besides, even if the driver did open the doors on the wrong side, us passengers aren't going to simply going to open them walk onto the other track like Lemmings.

Sorry, I've not seen your post. It's a long thread so it's hard to dig back and find the quote!

The fact is, it happens. It's recorded on the OTMR and more importantly, your record. You've driven 120 stops a day, your fatigued. You've stopped and released the doors on the left hand side of the unit (next to the power brake controller) for the past 15 stations. This station has a platform on the right but your so set in a routine you've hit the doors on the left.

Someone suggested, stopping and waiting a few seconds with the controller in neutral and then releasing the doors to ensure safety. Within in this time a guard could have checked the platform and released the doors, so this "time saving" argument is falling to bits.

With the culture of been glued to a mobile phone screen it wouldn't surprise me that someone walks straight into the cess if a train stopped short!

Another thing, if FGW have this DOO operation (with onboard staff), it would cost them more to pay High Speed Drivers to operate doors. We aren't talking a one off £50 payment down the pub here. If TMs are on the same pay and conditions then where exactly is this saving? I'm not convinced the extra revenue is there to subsidise the cost of this... That's before Industrial Action is even uttered

 

[yorkie]

...The fact is, it happens.....

true, but it can happen with a Guard too. And it does. Do you have any verified stats to say it's more common on DOO services? Either way these incidents are rare.