Would you want to travel on staffless public transport?

[PTR 444]

By that, I mean any driverless train, bus or tram without any other member of staff on board.

We know widespread adoption of driverless vehicles is some way off yet, but progress in recent years has been rapid. I reckon at some point this century, we will see some sort of completely driverless technology in public service somewhere in the world that also allows for completely staffless operation.

Having no member of staff on board at all may seem desirable in terms of keeping costs down, thus making fares cheaper while enabling loss-making routes to become profitable, but many people like having a responsible human on board to keep them safe and reassure them in the event that something goes wrong. There is the risk that if you remove that member of staff, people will shun shared public transport over fears that they may get trapped on board when things go wrong, or intimidated and harassed by others in the absence of an authority figure. Saying that though, I’m sure there are likely to be some good willing members of the public on board who would step in should those eventualities happen.

With that in mind, it makes sense to ask the question to determine whether staffless public transport will ever be a profitable option, bearing in mind that on board staffing is one of the biggest costs of public transport. In the case of buses, are we more likely to see a halfway house situation where drivers become on board staff members, albeit with a pay cut? Could we even see both operate in parallel, with fares on the staffless service being cheaper than the staffed service?

 

[ainsworth74]

I'm not sure I can answer the poll because I don't want to travel on staff less public transport but I will travel on it as and when necessary such as on the Nuremberg U-bahn where some trains are fully automated. Personally I think the future, certainly for urban systems like metros and similar, should probably be driverless but with an onboard member of staff in the same sort of role as those on the DLR. I've thought for a while the DLR is a good model to adopt for high frequency metro services.

 

[stuu]

Yes, and I have done loads of times. Paris metro line 1 and 14, Lille Metro and various others. No one seems obviously put off

 

[Snow1964]

Difficult to give a generalised answer, rather depends on complexity

People are used to lifts /elevators being unstaffed, so up/down not a problem, travelators are effectively transport moving you horizontally, generally also accepted.

Driverless metros are used commonly, but something with lot of complicated interactions like a tram is likely to need step up in attitudes.

 

[Sorcerer]

I suppose the answer requires context, but generally I would be fine travelling on unstaffed transport if it were grade separated such as an automatic metro or people mover like you see at airports. Maybe I'd be less inclined if it was on a mixed-traffic railway but that said I would expect any unstaffed transport would have gone through safety tests and assessments and thus there probably won't be much to worry about.

 

[Taunton]

Here on the DLR we have trains with commonly three non-gangwayed units, the conductor can be in the rear one, nobody in the other two, no driver, no staff anywhere on the station, no gatelines in and out, no platform edge doors, goes through tunnels, runs at the west end alongside the Fenchurch Street main line, and at Stratford, with no additional distance between tracks - and it has been like this for getting on for 40 years now. I think it's one of the least crime spots on the TfL network.

Every visitor to London we have loves it and is fascinated by it all.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I already have done, many times, on Paris Metro lines 1, 4 and 14 - which are GOA4 standard with no on board staff at all.

 

[bramling]

By that, I mean any driverless train, bus or tram without any other member of staff on board.

We know widespread adoption of driverless vehicles is some way off yet, but progress in recent years has been rapid. I reckon at some point this century, we will see some sort of completely driverless technology in public service somewhere in the world that also allows for completely staffless operation.

Having no member of staff on board at all may seem desirable in terms of keeping costs down, thus making fares cheaper while enabling loss-making routes to become profitable, but many people like having a responsible human on board to keep them safe and reassure them in the event that something goes wrong. There is the risk that if you remove that member of staff, people will shun shared public transport over fears that they may get trapped on board when things go wrong, or intimidated and harassed by others in the absence of an authority figure. Saying that though, I’m sure there are likely to be some good willing members of the public on board who would step in should those eventualities happen.

With that in mind, it makes sense to ask the question to determine whether staffless public transport will ever be a profitable option, bearing in mind that on board staffing is one of the biggest costs of public transport. In the case of buses, are we more likely to see a halfway house situation where drivers become on board staff members, albeit with a pay cut? Could we even see both operate in parallel, with fares on the staffless service being cheaper than the staffed service?

I am happy to travel on a DOO train. However I wouldn’t want to be on one that isn’t staffed at all.

 

[birchesgreen]

No, the most i would like to do is DLR level with a staff member aboard who can take over if things go wrong.

 

[Bald Rick]

No, the most i would like to do is DLR level with a staff member aboard who can take over if things go wrong.

Have you not used the Birmingham Airport - International people mover?

(or similar at Heathrow / Gatwick / Stansted / Luton / other places around the world?)

 

[birchesgreen]

Have you not used the Birmingham Airport - International people mover?

(or similar at Heathrow / Gatwick / Stansted / Luton / other places around the world?)

I have been on stuff like that (though the original maglev in BHX's case), doesn't mean i have to like it.

 

[Basil Jet]

Lifts are staffless public transport. People get stuck in them occasionally but most people still use them. I don't see why horizontal transport would be any different.

 

[Meerkat]

Have you not used the Birmingham Airport - International people mover?

(or similar at Heathrow / Gatwick / Stansted / Luton / other places around the world?)

They are short shuttles on transport sites, not a multi stop metro through an urban area.

 

[Bald Rick]

They are short shuttles on transport sites, not a multi stop metro through an urban area.

and?

 

[Meerkat]

and?

Thought it was obvious. Likely to be better problem response and much less likely to be populated with undesirable fellow passengers (and nearby plod to respond).

 

[Bald Rick]

Thought it was obvious. Likely to be better problem response and much less likely to be populated with undesirable fellow passengers (and nearby plod to respond).

Thanks - it wasnt obvious to me.

In any event, plenty of other cities around the world seem to manage just fine.

 

[J-2739]

I would have absolutely no qualms about riding staffless public transport. Not much of a difference from riding a lift.

For those of you who voted otherwise, y'all chickens!

 

[RJ]

I would have absolutely no qualms about riding staffless public transport. Not much of a difference from riding a lift.

For those of you who voted otherwise, y'all chickens!

I know you say the last bit in jest but it really is a matter of perspective. Some demographics get frequent unwanted advances from people who are hard to get rid of, some may have conditions which mean having somebody present to help would be reassuring. Some may need physical assistance.

 

[The exile]

Although in theory correct, the lift comparison is only good as far as it goes. A lift cannot crash into the one in front, nor is it likely to meet with any obstructions in its path (yes, I know it’s possible, but gravity precludes things just “lying there”.) If for any reason I wish to leave the lift at the next opportunity I’m still in the same building and not stuck at a station miles from where I want to go in the rain etc.

 

[jon81uk]

I know you say the last bit in jest but it really is a matter of perspective. Some demographics get frequent unwanted advances from people who are hard to get rid of, some may have conditions which mean having somebody present to help would be reassuring. Some may need physical assistance.

Although a driver sat at the front of a vehicle is unlikely to be able to assist in those situations anyway. On something like a tube train having station/platform staff would be more useful in those cases than a driver in a cab at the front.

 

[Simon11]

I would rather have major/key stations properly manned who can provide much better assistance than staff on a train.

The reality is that a single member of staff won't be able to provide much help in an incident when dealing with hundreds of people on a train and are very unlikely to challenge very poor behaviour (especially working alone). If anything major happens to the train like a major accident, the people most likely to be injured are the train staff since they will most likely be moving through the train or in large open spaces, thus rendering them unable to help.

Thus having stations with several members of staff can deal with these incidents as a team and perform better plus with a control room which can view CCTV & talk to passengers.

 

[renegademaster]

Evac isnt a problem as long as you have an at level walkway next to it like most of the airport people movers

 

[Tetchytyke]

In a purpose built setting I wouldn’t have an issue. The Dubai Metro is really safe and a really good metro system. But then it has a constant evacuation walkway next to the track.

I wouldn’t be so keen on, say, the Underground deep tube lines.

 

[boiledbeans2]

I've been on the Turin metro, and it is literally staffless.

No staff on the train (fully automated)
No staff at the stations (at least not visible). Therefore, there is quite a bit of tailgating at the ticket barriers.

Anyway, practically all new-build Metros around the world now are fully automatic (see Singapore with multiple new lines, or the Milan M4 metro with a convient connection to Linate Airport). As they are new-build, unions aren't able to make a fuss about loss of jobs.

 

[jagardner1984]

The problem here is …. Humans.

Not that you particularly need someone to press the buttons to move a train - clearly, see DLR, you do not.

However - at various points in my experience on staffed Metro service - there have been delays “due to a passenger incident” - usually someone getting attention of paramedics following some moment or other.

Staff on such services aren’t perfect - often just because of where they are and where the incident is they have to be alerted to the problem or discover it themselves when moving through the train.

But I struggle to see how it will be as clear to passengers “who do I get to help” if they are entirely unstaffed. I’m not convinced call buttons which will allegedly connect to remote control rooms will be nearly as effective.

Much like staffed checkouts in supermarkets, or the ability to engage with various government finances through the local post office, if the staff provide reassurance and support for someone who might really need it, then I think they absolutely should be preserved.

Recently I observed someone with fairly significant disabilities boarding and alighting the train. And I must say it was handled beautifully. Platform staff were waiting with the passenger. They signalled to the driver who had had an advance radio call on the topic (not very soundproof doors in the leading car !). They boarded and seated the passenger kindly and efficiently - but of course, the dwell time was significantly increased. At the other station, platform staff waited and the process reversed. It made me wonder how this would all work in a staff free environment - and how a little human interaction really enabled that passenger to lead a much more independent life. I’m sure there are ways platform edge doors can be overridden, buttons can be pressed, support summoned, but I can’t help but think at some point, passengers will be left attempting to block doors as they automatically repeatedly close on a passenger still trying to exit in their wheelchair …. In a way that most rail staff are very conscientious in avoiding.

I’m not sure the removal of more and more human interaction from our lives can show any evidence of making them better, safer, cheaper, fairer, inclusive.

 

[jon81uk]

Not that you particularly need someone to press the buttons to move a train - clearly, see DLR, you do not.

The DLR does need a person to press a button (to close the doors) before the train will move. In that way it is not very different to many other tube and train lines, other than there is no cab for the staff to hide in.

 

[Ken H]

I think many vulnerable people will be put off. Especially with antisocial elements in our society today. Just asked the missus. She says a definite 'no'.

 

[renegademaster]

Personal safety wise its no different than an SDO train or when the guard is stuck in the other non gangwayed unit

 

[Meerkat]

Personal safety wise its no different than an SDO train or when the guard is stuck in the other non gangwayed unit

Except those have someone on the train that you can at least talk to.

 

[renegademaster]

Except those have someone on the train that you can at least talk to.

The driver is very unlikely to leave the cab so its about the same as pressing an emergency button that goes to a call center or a nearby station