SWT Leaving Clapham jct without guard onboard.

[Monty]

Not so long ago there was a similar incident at Clapham Junction on a hot summers day (the reason I mention this will become clear). A 455 stopped at the station while another had also called at Clapham in the opposite direction (just so we are clear than means the unit's had stopped side by side to each other). The guard on the train involved completed his platform duties but had yet to close his local door and give the driver the ready to start signal. But the train started to leave the platform, the guard some how managed to jump back into the cab and make an emergency application of the brakes. When the incident was investigated it was found that the driver heard the bells from the unit opposite but because it had been very hot, all the cab windows in both units had been left open and the driver thought the signal he had heard had come from his cab when in fact they had not.

It's not always the case of gross negligence requiring summary executions sackings of the staff involved.

 

[bnm]

Is that your answer for every mistake? :roll:

It wasn't an answer. It was a question. Perfectly reasonable to ask.

 

[Olaf]

Is that your answer for every mistake? :roll:

No, it was a question; the reason being whether to be expecting the cynical follow-on strike on SWT if one or other of the crew was sacked.

Further, if the guard was NOT sacked, would the RMT not demand that he/she was sacked for allowing the train to proceed in an unsafe condition, and for running right through their claims that guards are essential for the safe operation of trains on our railways?

 

[Pinza-C55]

I remember in the early days of the Networkers when I was based at London Bridge one of our guards had to start a 2 unit formation away from Cannon Street. He did, and watched the front unit depart leaving him behind on the rear unit. Apparently the coupling had made electrical contact but was still not physically locked. To put it simply, odd things happen from time to time.

 

[Monty]

No, it was a question; the reason being whether to be expecting the cynical follow-on strike on SWT if one or other of the crew was sacked.

Further, if the guard was NOT sacked, would the RMT not demand that he/she was sacked for allowing the train to proceed in an unsafe condition, and for running right through their claims that guards are essential for the safe operation of trains on our railways?

This is assuming the guard was actually at fault, but you don't know that do you? I have already given an example in recent memory where a train departed without the guard and had not done anything untoward. Also FYI the guard's grade on SWT have not balloted for industrial action of the dismissal of a colleague in a very long time. In fact he last ballot we had period was 2012 and before then I can't even remember so I don't understand why you are being so cynical?