Cycling UK Forum

SpannerGeek wrote:The issue is quite straightforward: (though largely misunderstood by the public) it's train guards vs either ticket collectors or more likely no on train staff at all.

Guards do 18 months training in all aspects of train safety and health and safety, as well as recusitation techniques and medical emergency. These are the people who get you safely off the train when there's a fire in carriage A, or use the defibrillator when you've had a heart attack. They also look after your daughter when shes the recipient of unwanted attention from yobs.

It's specialist, invaluable training and private train operators don't want to pay for it and would rather do away with it. The unions are rightly incensed by this.

Hence the completely justified strike action.

AIUI long distance routes continue to have guards (pls correct me if my understanding is incorrect) because distances between stations may be significant. I get that (to quote our dearly beloved former leader )

On the commuter routes I see the requirement much less clearly tbh.

If the door opening person (guard, ticket collector, train manager, whatever) is currently on the train, and will stll be on the train after the change, what will he/she be doing in the time they currently operate the doors? Collecting more ticket money?

Boyd wrote:

Mick F wrote:
If I was able to advise and suggest, the whole staff should resign.
Don't strike ............... resign on mass.

They have mortgages and children to feed.

So who pays them when they're on strike?
Their union?
Do they get as much as when they are working?
If they resigned .......... or even went on indefinite strike ........... the train company would bow to their wishes. They'd have to because their company would collapse overnight.

Also, I reckon that the train company should wind its neck in and leave everything as it is, and then enter into arbitration over the long term to sort this sorry mess out. At this moment by doing and acting like they are BOTH doing, no-one wins and everyone loses, especially the customers.

Bang their heads together.

Mick F wrote:Do they get as much as when they are working?
If they resigned .......... or even went on indefinite strike ...........

Resigning would have an adverse effect on such things as future redundancy payments and any time served element to salary. It just isn't practical. Plus when the time came to recruit it would be an opportunity to selectively choose not to employ troublemakers, maybe that employee who keeps pointing out safety hazards...

the train company would bow to their wishes. They'd have to because their company would collapse overnight.

Well no, Southern rail's profits are assured, they've been handed such a ridiculous contract that we're paying them whether the trains run or not. You might speculate that if this wasn't the case it'd have been solved a long time ago.

Also, I reckon that the train company should wind its neck in and leave everything as it is, and then enter into arbitration over the long term to sort this sorry mess out. At this moment by doing and acting like they are BOTH doing, no-one wins and everyone loses, especially the customers.

I think SR are incapable of running this franchise and were so long before this dispute, it should be taken off them, then sack whatever civil servants and ministers allowed such a situation to escalate. But make no mistake, the government are pulling the strings, it's the dogma of the 80s - don't be seen giving in to the unions at any cost. And the unions have again been painted into such a corner that their choices are fight or die. A new franchise should be obliged to agree to binding arbitration, it should be led by such a respected transport figure that the public would see it as even handed and the unions couldn't afford not to agree to.

Bang their heads together.

Yes, but it's no always obvious which heads.

Vitara wrote:[...
My comparison would be Air Travel rather than DLR. Put in vending machines for in flight food and drink service and you could have pilot only operated planes?

A bit off-tiopic but I understood that one of the main reasons for in flight food (on shorter flights) was to keep passengers in their seats. If you have your table down and a tray of food/cutlers, etc. then you are much less likely to get up and wander around.

Ian

PH has summed it up very well in his post above.

With no financial loss involved for Southern Rail they can afford to continue this dispute ad infinitum regardless of the cost to others. Also I suspect managers are working under the directive that they push these changes through or they find another job.

You only need to review this thread to see that opinion is divided as to whether there is a safety issue involved, or not.

I'm clear that there is, but it will only be when an incident occurs that there will be real evidence to support this view.

I don't work in the rail industry and use trains infrequently, but I do work in another public organisation where the ongoing pursuit of greater efficiency and cost savings mean we have been in the headlines most days for the last fortnight, and those of us in the front line can only get on with trying to do the impossible with the staffing resources we have available.

I've no doubt these changes will eventually be put through, in which case you could argue the union and workers should just give in to them, after all it's already been said no one will lose their job. I'm reminded of a verse from Sweet Home Alabama:

"In Birmingham they love the gov' nor (boo, boo, boo)
Now we all did what we could do
Now Watergate does not bother me
Does your conscience bother you?"

I think they are trying to do away with the wrong member of train staff. Dealing with the public is a job that needs a human, driving a train might not be.

Perhaps the guard could have a remote with green and red buttons. Green for "close doors and proceed", red for "STOP".

Ruadh495 wrote:I think they are trying to do away with the wrong member of train staff. Dealing with the public is a job that needs a human, driving a train might not be.

Perhaps the guard could have a remote with green and red buttons. Green for "close doors and proceed", red for "STOP".

You mean run a train thru an Xbox

mercalia wrote:You mean run a train thru an Xbox

Why not ..... if you ever get the chance to visit a train operators control room you will wonder what exactly the drivers are doing .... apart from being a lookout ....
I was at Scunthorpe steel works last week ..... driverless shunters controlled by remote drivers ..... and the next step ????

661-Pete wrote:.....But.... [devil's advocate time]

It so happens that a few weeks ago I made several trips on a branch line elsewhere in the UK (not the southeast - but I won't be any more specific). On this line, the trains did have a guard, and the guard was indeed responsible for opening and closing the doors. Problem was, as I saw it, the guard was also tasked with selling tickets to passengers who'd boarded without one. So we had the situation where the guard was busy selling a ticket as the train drew into a station. Then he had to hurriedly complete the transaction and rush to the door bay, so he could operate the master switch allowing the doors to be opened. Not a safety issue, true, but a bit annoying to passengers waiting to get off.

There were no problems when it came to closing the doors. It was just the opening that got held up.
....
...

Isn't it normally the train driver who opens the doors, and guard who closes them:

thats what Scotrail agreed to end their strike.

(I have seen a driver open the wrong side doors (on local trains where guard closes them etc) so was puzzled as I thought the guard less likely to make that mistake (cos are at the door to be opened) but that has the disadvantage you mentioned above. Of course presumably some sort of dumb simple electronics/transponder etc could be used to prevent the driver opening the wrong side for the platform.

Bonefishblues wrote:AIUI long distance routes continue to have guards (pls correct me if my understanding is incorrect) because distances between stations may be significant.

Your understanding is incorrect: a large sticking point on this is whether it's safe to have only the driver on the longest trains on the long busy mainline of the Southern network, the modern 12-car trains on the Brighton Mainline.

SA_SA_SA wrote:Isn't it normally the train driver who opens the doors, and guard who closes them: thats what Scotrail agreed to end their strike.

There is no "normally" on our railways. That's part of the problem, especially here. Thameslink uses part of the Southern network as part of one of its routes and has some driver-only trains (as do various other parts of the UK), but the overlap of stations is about 10% of the Southern network, operates differently to what's proposed for Southern (as I understand it), was agreed years ago and hasn't been reviewed.

Of course presumably some sort of dumb simple electronics/transponder etc could be used to prevent the driver opening the wrong side for the platform.

Can't be too dumb, else it might prevent emergency exits... but generally, it's a bit of surprise we don't have platform detection already, but then government puts as little money as it thinks it can into railways and private operators take as much as they can out. They're being very slow to install door edge detectors that can stop a train pulling away with someone's hand trapped in the doors, even to driver-only trains

To me, one of the key arguments is that in an emergency, drivers often need help, because they're incapacitated or trapped, or because they're busy with urgent tasks to keep the surviving trains safe. It's probably a bit much to expect one railway worker, who's possibly injured or at least suffering from shock after a collision, to get 1100+ passengers off the train safely alone. Relying on the chance of having off-duty safety-qualified railway workers or transport police aboard doesn't seem like a great way to handle public safety.

There is no "normally" on our railways

I suppose I should have said 'more usually'

I read in rail magazine mag that all new franchise bidders must agree to DOO....

SA_SA_SA wrote:Isn't it normally the train driver who opens the doors, and guard who closes them:

Not on the trains I was on, it wasn't. I was watching as the guard definitely went to operate a (keyed) master switch. Once he did so, the halos around the 'door open' pushbuttons lit up, and not before.

In large stations, especially termini, it's often unpredictable which side the platform will be, and it will be the driver who knows first. So maybe it makes sense for him/her to be given the door-opening responsibility.

661-Pete wrote:...Not on the trains I was on, it wasn't. I was watching as the guard definitely went to operate a (keyed) master switch. Once he did so, the halos around the 'door open' pushbuttons lit up, and not before....

Well, as mentioned by mjr it seems to vary. Perhaps there is an either or ability.
Locally, I had always assumed only the guard opened the doors till a driver briefly opened the wrong side.

661-Pete wrote:...In large stations, especially termini, it's often unpredictable which side the platform will be, and it will be the driver who knows first. So maybe it makes sense for him/her to be given the door-opening responsibility.

But the guard will be looking out over platform/track so slightly less likely to open the wrong side to step onto was my thinkling....

Sometimes I hanker after the old slam-door stock, despite its inherent dangers. At least we didn't have this kind of 'who-does-what' dispute back then.

And as a very young lad, I regret to say, I was known for jumping on or off moving trains. Not something I'd recommend even if it were possible! Mea culpa. Easy enough on the old steam trains (and some diesels) which had very slow acceleration, but not to be attempted on some of the Southern Region EMUs (4-SUBs especially - they could accelerate like a torpedo...)!

But I remember one incident - quite a lot later in my life, when I was 'old enough to know better' but still back in the days of slam-doors. I was already seated in the train just as it was moving off (at Haywards Heath this was, I recall) and a young chap runs up, opens the door next to me and jumps on. He immediately makes for the connecting door with the next carriage and disappears. Well, the train judders to a halt: the guard (yes - guards all round in those days) evidently having used the emergency stop, comes storming up the platform to where I'm sitting, wrenches open the door, gestures at me with his thumb and yells "OUT!!". Evidently I bore a slight resemblance to the guy who'd jumped on. Well all I could do was plead "it wasn't me, he went off that-a-way". It was scary for a moment, I was wondering whether I was about to be handed over to the cops or something! Luckily another passenger who'd seen it happen backed me up....