Would ending DOO be unfeasible?

[tiptoptaff]

Following a question raised in the RMT vs ASLEF thread, I have taken Yorkie's invitation to create a speculative thread.

Would it be feasible to not only stop the expansion of DOO, but to completely reverse it's introduction, and return to a Safety Critical Guard on board every train? This excludes London Underground or various tram/light rail systems, as they are beyond the scope of what we generally consider when discussing DOO.

I'll start with my opinion - Yes, I think it would be. It would cost a gargantuan sum of money in training, stock modifications and ongoing salary, for what would be seen to be a relatively poor ROI, when compared with current DOO+RPI set ups. I also think it's money better spent elsewhere on staff costs in the current climate, preserving staffing levels rather than trying to increase it unnecessarily.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would say that reinstating a second member of staff on all mainline trains may well be an achievable and desirable job creation scheme, particularly now the Government has the reins of it all. It could be easily justified on the grounds of accessibility (as it would guarantee turn-up-and-go wheelchair access), and could replace platform staff in some locations, as well as reduce ticketless travel.

However, I'm not sure that e.g. retrofitting door panels would be worthwhile, and you would lengthen some running times by moving to guard release, as it is about 5-10 seconds slower than driver release overall (and ten-bell even slower and faffier). So I would say if it happened, an OBS a like would be more likely than an actual safety critical guard with door control. There are also places where due to e.g. steeply curved platforms driver dispatch with on-board cameras is easier, not more difficult.

 

[tiptoptaff]

I would say that reinstating a second member of staff on all mainline trains may well be an achievable and desirable job creation scheme, particularly now the Government has the reins of it all. It could be easily justified on the grounds of accessibility (as it would guarantee turn-up-and-go wheelchair access), and could replace platform staff in some locations.

However, I'm not sure that e.g. retrofitting door panels would be worthwhile, and you would lengthen some running times by moving to guard release, as it is about 5-10 seconds slower than driver release overall. So I would say if it happened, an OBS a like would be more likely than an actual safety critical guard with door control. There are also places where due to e.g. steeply curved platforms driver dispatch with on-board cameras is easier, not more difficult.

I would suggest that, by the generally accepted definition, or at least, the one preferred by RMT, is that an OBS/second member of staff would still be DOO, if they weren't doing the doors

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would suggest that, by the generally accepted definition, or at least, the one preferred by RMT, is that an OBS/second member of staff would still be DOO, if they weren't doing the doors

Yes, they probably would. I was countering the original post in a way - yes, I think adding a second member of staff on all trains viable, but no, I wouldn't think it feasible or sensible for that person to be an actual traditional Guard with door control etc. I think an OBS like role would be more likely.

 

[BayPaul]

I guess the government's challenge with that would be that a job creation scheme is for life, not just for Covid. I would imagine that they would prefer to add people into areas where there would be fewer union challenges with removing them again when the country is back at a high-level of employment, such as into capital project work

 

[yorkie]

I like trains to have a second person. However what I really like is the system we have in the Glasgow area, where the second person constantly patrols the passenger areas of the train and has to be visible at all times.

Every time I visit Glasgow I never cease to be impressed by the overwhelmingly friendly, helpful staff. They diligently ensure everyone has a ticket, while not incorrectly charging people. They strike just the right balance. And they can continue to make ticket sales while the doors open when the train comes to a stand (I prefer this to what we get on Northern where there can be a delay before the doors open).

I've made long distance journeys e.g. Stafford to a suburban Glasgow station on 4 trains (changing at Crewe, Preston & Glasgow) where no-one looked at the ticket until the last train from Glasgow Central.

Would I support ditching these staff and replacing them with what we have on Northern/TPE where you seldom see any staff in the passenger saloon? Definitely not! I would strongly oppose this.

But would I support increasing staffing levels so that we could achieve this method of working everywhere? Yes, absolutely I would. But that isn't what the opening post proposes, so I can't support the proposals as currently worded.

 

[Energy]

I think DOO but with some staff members to help out customers, do ticket checks etc. is the best solution. What advantage does having them control doors over the driver bring? It may be worth having them close doors though unless the operator is already DOO.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

My favourite saying or one of them : "Everything is possible with enough time, money and the political will" so to answer the OP- going back to DOO is very doable. A retrograde step but doable.

 

[Bald Rick]

A challenge to the OP.

Why is the tube out of scope? If DOO was rescinded, why would it be acceptable for, say, a 114 metre long train designed for guard operation, with 24(?) doors a side to operate between Queens Park and Harrow and Wealdstone to operate DOO, but an 80m long train specifically designed for DOO with 8 doors a side to operate on exactly the same tracks, using exactly the same platforms, but require a second person to open the doors?

Anyway, the answer is anything is feasible, with the right amount of money, effort, and within the laws of physics. However it’s not viable, and neither is it desirable.

 

[387star]

Yes, they probably would. I was countering the original post in a way - yes, I think adding a second member of staff on all trains viable, but no, I wouldn't think it feasible or sensible for that person to be an actual traditional Guard with door control etc. I think an OBS like role would be more likely.

What about Greater Anglia. The Guards are still trained to operate doors but only for camera failure scenarios. Not sure how they maintain competency