W Driver Only Operated Trains (DOO) discussion

[455driver]

Just been speaking to an acquaintance who, as a non-driver having business in London and Oxford, uses trains from Penzance on a fairly regular basis. He told me of his horrible journey on Friday night from Paddington on the 19.00, train rammed and no air con working over the whole journey: the TM was making valiant efforts with water being brought on at various stations to alleviate matters, so no tickets were inspected at any stage (almost unprecedented these days) and the train was very late arriving at PZ. In this Brave New World Scenario, what is to prevent that whole journey being made with driver only 'in extremis' - I realise it is more than one duty, but during disruption it could easily happen that consecutive duty bods were missing. Suppose somebody collapsed and died of heat exhaustion during one of these all-too-common failures of aircon: one could imagine a coroner recommending that no long distance train be allowed to proceed without a member of staff other than the driver present.

why would it need to be 'in extremis'?
FGW wont clear up exactly what they mean by 'disruption' or what they mean by a TM (not necessarily a Train Manager) will be 'booked' to each journey!

 

[Busaholic]

why would it need to be 'in extremis'?
FGW wont clear up exactly what they mean by 'disruption' or what they mean by a TM (not necessarily a Train Manager) will be 'booked' to each journey!

I'm quite happy to withdraw the phrase, which was only put in to placate those who say it will rarely happen in practice. If it is allowed in principle, it will happen in practice, and the practice will get more frequent, that is the way of the world, or in this part of it at least. It needs somebody big and respected throughout the railway industry (and where do such figures lurk nowadays?) to come out and make a statement that it would be a completely unacceptable practice, such that they would have to be listened to by DafT. Actually, couldn't one of these thousands of people who dabble in 'health and safety' actually do something useful for a change and condemn it out of hand?

 

[Carlisle]

I'm quite happy to withdraw the phrase, which was only put in to placate those who say it will rarely happen in practice. If it is allowed in principle, it will happen in practice, and the practice will get more frequent, that is the way of the world, or in this part of it at least. It needs somebody big and respected throughout the railway industry (and where do such figures lurk nowadays?) to come out and make a statement that it would be a completely unacceptable practice, such that they would have to be listened to by DafT. Actually, couldn't one of these thousands of people who dabble in 'health and safety' actually do something useful for a change and condemn it out of hand?

So your saying it would be far better/safer in every case to cancel the train completely and transfer all the passengers onto coaches Busses,Taxis,private cars ,cycling, walking etc.
Ok nobody knows with absolute certainty that some crazy regular totally staffless trains idea won't be suggested by some bafoon somewhere sometime in the distant future but this isn't what's being planned by FGW if their present statements bear any grain of truth at all.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Actually, couldn't one of these thousands of people who dabble in 'health and safety' actually do something useful for a change and condemn it out of hand?

Because if they did, we'd best cancel all the Thames Valley locals, Thameslink, LO, LU trains (etc) until guards can be recruited and trained. Because it's dangerous, isn't it?

That would be a rather, shall we say, dangerous precedent.

(I personally take the view that guard operation is safer and thus preferable, though I do prefer driver-released doors because of the shorter stops it affords where the guard does revenue on busy lines with frequent stops, but I don't take the line that IC is any different in safety terms to regional services. There is a customer service argument for another member of staff on IC, but either DOO is safe enough or it isn't, regardless of what services it is used on)

 

[Flamingo]

So your saying it would be far better/safer in every case to cancel the train completely and transfer all the passengers onto coaches Busses,Taxis,private cars ,cycling, walking etc.
Ok nobody knows with absolute certainty that some crazy regular totally staffless trains idea won't be suggested by some bafoon somewhere sometime in the distant future but this isn't what's being planned by FGW if their present statements bear any grain of truth at all.

How often do you think trains have to be cancelled because of lack of a guard? They might be delayed waiting for a guard on a delayed inbound service, or having a mandatory break, but that is much more usually waiting for a driver.

At the moment, huge efforts will be made to cover a Guards turn to avoid having to cancel the train - because of the cost of cancelation (which is why that penalty was written in to each and every franchise).

If a train could be run without a guard, do you honestly think that the same efforts would be made? Disruption will come to de facto mean "not wanting to pay overtime". It is easy to roster a TM on each train - that's a paper exercise. I've been told in an unguarded moment "It's disgraceful that a guard can hold the company to ransom and demand extra payment for working overtime", which revealed some of the mindset behind this proposal.

Guards do more inside the train than check tickets, they do more in an emergency than ring the signaller to say it's all gone wrong. It is not necessary that we do this on the majority of trains, but it is necessary.

 

[craigybagel]

So your saying it would be far better/safer in every case to cancel the train completely and transfer all the passengers onto coaches Busses,Taxis,private cars ,cycling, walking etc.
Ok nobody knows with absolute certainty that some crazy regular totally staffless trains idea won't be suggested by some bafoon somewhere sometime in the distant future but this isn't what's being planned by FGW if their present statements bear any grain of truth at all.

No, it would be safer to resource a Guard for the train somehow and have them onboard, by virtue of spare staff or staff working rest days/overtime. The fear is that FGW will use any excuse to run a train without a guard, since so far they haven't made clear under what circumstances such things will take place.

 

[bnm]

Talks have collapsed and the strike goes ahead. Thus far we only have the RMT's statement for the reasons why the talks were not fruitful.

It seems to me that the reason is the RMT's bloody minded ****(self censored word - deemed to emotive months later) and unwillingness to even move to some common ground.

From the RMT:

6 July 2015
RMT Press Office

RAIL UNION RMT said this morning that talks aimed at settling a dispute on First Great Western over the threat to jobs and safety from the introduction of the new Hitachi Inter-City trains have broken down without agreement and the forty eight hours of strike action across the company starting at 18.30 hours on Wednesday 8th July goes ahead as planned.

There will also be a rally in support of RMT’s members on FGW in their dispute at 17.00 hours Wednesday 8th July at Paddington station.

RMT said that First Great Western were simply playing for time in the talks and were going through the motions rather than tackling the fundamental issues at the heart of the dispute and addressing the union’s key points which are:

• To keep a safety competent Guard on every train.
• To keep safety critical station Despatch staff.
• To keep buffet car facilities on every train.
• To ensure that the maintenance of new rolling stock remains in-house.
• No job losses.


RMT General Secretary Mick Cash said:

“RMT has made every effort to secure a series of very basic assurances from FGW over jobs, services and safety as a result of the introduction of the new Hitachi fleet and they have shown no intention of addressing those issues in the talks today. RMT is angry and disappointed that the company have ignored the massive vote for action by their staff and have instead opted to plough ahead with a series of actions that will decimate jobs, services and safety. As a result of FGW collapsing the talks in this cavalier fashion the action goes ahead as planned.

“It is frankly ludicrous that East Coast, who are introducing the same trains, have given us the assurances we are seeking but FGW have ignored us and are crashing on with the ripping out of buffet cars and the threat to safety-critical station and train staff purely to maximise the profits from new trains bought for them by the British taxpayer.

“RMT will be out at stations this week with a public campaign to expose this shabby and profiteering treatment of both passengers and staff alike by a company that already has one of the worst reputations in the industry for milking the rotten rail privatisation racket for every penny they can. The “Worst Great Western” tag has been wrapped around this outfit by their own passengers and RMT will be building alliances with the services users to exert further pressure to end this outrageous profiteering and corner-cutting that will come at a heavy price in terms of jobs and safety.”

Is it possible to organise a counter demonstration at Paddington? Show the dinosaurs at the RMT that they do not have the support of the travelling public.

Oh and 'massive vote for action'??? Just 41% of those eligible to vote in the ballot said yes to a strike. Welcome to cloud cuckoo land where 41% is somehow massive. :roll::roll::roll:

 

[cactustwirly]

I think FGW have been fair, for example they have promised that jobs will kept for the remainder of the franchise, realistically they cannot promise anymore because they have no control over the next franchise.

I do not see how keeping a buffet has any relevance as it requires the same amount of staff as a trolley. Also it is out of FGW's control as the IEP has been ordered by the DfT.

Their press release is full of errors and unsubstantiated claims over "profiteering". For example:

new trains bought for them by the British taxpayer

They are actually bought by Agility trains where Hitachi is the majority stakeholder.

I think the RMT live in the past and need to wake up to the present.

 

[Flamingo]

Trolleys have been trialled time after time on Intercity services. They have never worked. But, hey, if the customers are happy with the trolley not being able to get through, or having no stock when it gets there, that's ok...

 

[Busaholic]

Because if they did, we'd best cancel all the Thames Valley locals, Thameslink, LO, LU trains (etc) until guards can be recruited and trained. Because it's dangerous, isn't it?

That would be a rather, shall we say, dangerous precedent.

(I personally take the view that guard operation is safer and thus preferable, though I do prefer driver-released doors because of the shorter stops it affords where the guard does revenue on busy lines with frequent stops, but I don't take the line that IC is any different in safety terms to regional services. There is a customer service argument for another member of staff on IC, but either DOO is safe enough or it isn't, regardless of what services it is used on)

I take it you'll be writing to the Civil Aviation Authority next explaining why it is quite unnecessary for any passenger flights to have any crew members other than the pilots once the plane has left the ground??

 

[Carlisle]

It is easy to roster a TM on each train - that's a paper exercise. I've been told in an unguarded moment "It's disgraceful that a guard can hold the company to ransom and demand extra payment for working overtime", which revealed some of the mindset behind this proposal.

.

On reading the unions latest statement today I'll be the first to agree with you that if this is nothing more than a major staff reduction/removal exercise they your campaign is totally right.

However seeing as nobody yet seems to know any actual details of how things will work in practice, RMT could have at least kept negotiating for longer rather then rushing head first into a strike in the hope that all changes will simply be scrapped

A railway that is unable to modernise is only going to lead eventually to more major cuts/ changes, decline and maybe closures.

 

[bnm]

Trolleys have been trialled time after time on Intercity services. They have never worked. But, hey, if the customers are happy with the trolley not being able to get through, or having no stock when it gets there, that's ok...

Don't CrossCountry and East Midlands use trolleys? Are you saying they aren't Intercity services?

 

[313103]

Talks have collapsed and the strike goes ahead. Thus far we only have the RMT's statement for the reasons why the talks were not fruitful.

It seems to me that the reason is the RMT's bloody minded belligerence and unwillingness to even move to some common ground.

From the RMT:



Is it possible to organise a counter demonstration at Paddington? Show the dinosaurs at the RMT that they do not have the support of the travelling public.

Oh and 'massive vote for action'??? Just 41% of those eligible to vote in the ballot said yes to a strike. Welcome to cloud cuckoo land where 41% is somehow massive. :roll::roll::roll:

Well nothing surprises me from your anti Union diatribe. You really have a problem with them don't you.

How about we should be concerned by what first great western haven't said rather then what they have said as this is more about there belligerent and intransigent stance as to way we are at this empass.

 

[Essexman]

I'm not anti union (or although I am anti Tory and anti privitisation) but I don't understand why the rail industry continues to be beset with strikes while they are now rare elsewhere.

Thanks to these strikes I've got to find a way of getting to Cardiff for the test match not using the tube and either avoiding FGW or probably having to stand in a packed train for 2 hours.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I take it you'll be writing to the Civil Aviation Authority next explaining why it is quite unnecessary for any passenger flights to have any crew members other than the pilots once the plane has left the ground??

There is one big difference between that and DOO, which is that there are already DOO trains in operation in large swathes of the country. If there weren't I'd see your point, of course.

FWIW, I have been on a commercial flight (a small "hopper" seaplane thing in Canada) which was, you might say, pilot-only operated. But that's by the by really.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

There is one big difference between that and DOO, which is that there are already DOO trains in operation in large swathes of the country. If there weren't I'd see your point, of course.

FWIW, I have been on a commercial flight (a small "hopper" seaplane thing in Canada) which was, you might say, pilot-only operated. But that's by the by really.

Hardly large swathes of the country approx 30% is DOO and that is mainly in the south east and scotland

 

[Bletchleyite]

Hardly large swathes of the country approx 30% is DOO and that is mainly in the south east and scotland

Approximately 30% of what? Route miles? Passenger miles?

We could argue about that for ages, but the fact remains that there is significant use of DOO in the UK at present. Therefore, if it is felt that it is totally unsafe, ALL DOO must be withdrawn *now*, or at the very least a deadline set for its complete withdrawal and replacement with guard operation.

If the fact is that it is simply a bit less safe (but still safer than, say, driving a private car), an altogether more rational debate is needed.

I can understand how people are upset about the threat to their jobs, of course, and why this makes it an emotive issue, but in my view the only way you solve these things is rational debate, removing the emotions as far as is possible.

 

[Flamingo]

On reading the unions latest statement today I'll be the first to agree with you that if this is nothing more than a major staff reduction/removal exercise they your campaign is totally right.

However seeing as nobody yet seems to know any actual details of how things will work in practice, RMT could have at least kept negotiating for longer rather then rushing head first into a strike in the hope that all changes will simply be scrapped

A railway that is unable to modernise is only going to lead eventually to more major cuts/ changes, decline and maybe closures.

I'm pretty sure that the union were willing to negotiate, but from things I have heard I have good reason to believe that management did not enter the meeting today with any intention of attempting to postpone the strike or negotiate in any meaningful way. The way this has been handled from the beginning by management has been to encourage a strike while paying lip service to giving staff any information or reassurance.

I do suspect that certain individuals would have been more disappointed by a NO vote, as far as I can see they have gone out of their way to push staff into a YES vote, for whatever reason. Being cynical, it might be so that any so-called promises regarding redundancies etc can be withdrawn and it'll be portrayed as the unions fault.

 

[bnm]

Well nothing surprises me from your anti Union diatribe. You really have a problem with them don't you.

How about we should be concerned by what first great western haven't said rather then what they have said as this is more about there belligerent and intransigent stance as to way we are at this empass.

Again you try to make it personal. :roll:

I've told you before, I'm a union member. I supported the RMT in their dispute with Network Rail, I supported RMT action at PNZ depot, there are other instances when I've supported the RMT.

I do not support the RMT or its members on this particular call to arms.

One is allowed to have nuanced views about unions and the particular disputes of individual unions. Unlike you I don't see unions as being a black or white, pro- or anti-, issue. One is also allowed to change their mind or have it changed by the side they disagree with.

Will striking FGW staff be boycotting CrossCountry Voyager services during the industrial action? One would hope so bearing in mind the reasons for this particular industrial action.

They have doors operated by the driver. They have a trolley catering service. They are trains that are maintained by the manufacturer.

 

[Temple Meads]

Don't CrossCountry and East Midlands use trolleys? Are you saying they aren't Intercity services?

And my experience of CrossCountry's trolleys is one of either the damned thing blocking one's route to the toilet/another coach, or the train being too crowded to allow it through.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And my experience of CrossCountry's trolleys is one of either the damned thing blocking one's route to the toilet/another coach, or the train being too crowded to allow it through.

As a passenger these days I prefer a trolley service, as it means I don't have to leave valuable electronics by my seat for anyone to steal, or have to carry a laptop bag as well as food and hot drinks back from the buffet car.

My real preference would be for a DB style sit-down Bistro with a standing bar area (I might even decide to spend my whole journey in such a facility, as I have done before in Germany) but if it's just going to buy stuff from a window it's much easier if it comes to me.

 

[bnm]

FGW's response to the break down of talks today. Note the measured language, lack of rhetoric or hyperbole:

"All we want is to make sure our services give the best possible deal for our passengers. These brand new trains have been designed to deliver more seats, and faster, more frequent journeys for passengers - but we can't deliver those if they are operated in the same way as the 40-year-old trains that run today.

"We have already made assurances about job security and commitments to increase the number of staff on board Super Express Trains.

"Today we have made a number of additional commitments that we believe meet the concerns of the RMT, while still allowing us to deliver the improvements our customers want to see.

"While it is disappointing that the RMT were not able to take this proposal away today, we believe a negotiated solution to these proposals is possible, and are keen to continue discussions as soon as possible."

http://www.expressandstar.com/business/city-news/2015/07/06/bid-to-avert-fgw-train-strike-fails/

Also note that additional commitments made by FGW were presumably flatly refused rather than taken to the membership.

Also note FGW's willingness to continue discussion. Something that was notably absent from the RMT's press release.

I maintain my opinion that, in this particular dispute, it is the RMT that are being **** (self censored word deemed inappropriate months later)

 

[plastictaffy]

Earlier in this thread, it mentions that FGW are sdaying a TM will be "diagammed" to every service, but they don't actually state when and where they may or may not use DOO. I had a conversation via Twitter with one of their guys a few months ago when this thorny issue first raised it's head, and I was told that the trains will be able to run DOO in times of disruption - like, exactly when a Guard is needed more than ever. She couldn't answer where the Guard might go or what he might do when there's disruption, mind.

 

[thelongestroad]

"Today we have made a number of additional commitments that we believe meet the concerns of the RMT, while still allowing us to deliver the improvements our customers want to see.

Anyone any ideas what they are?

 

[Flamingo]

Earlier in this thread, it mentions that FGW are sdaying a TM will be "diagammed" to every service, but they don't actually state when and where they may or may not use DOO. I had a conversation via Twitter with one of their guys a few months ago when this thorny issue first raised it's head, and I was told that the trains will be able to run DOO in times of disruption - like, exactly when a Guard is needed more than ever. She couldn't answer where the Guard might go or what he might do when there's disruption, mind.

I've been told (or it was let slip) that disruption includes being unwilling to pay overtime...

 

[bnm]

Anyone any ideas what they are?

We may not know, other than hearsay, as it would seem that the RMT won't be taking those 'additional commitments' to the membership for them to mull over.

Seemingly not only belligerent, but entrenched.

 

[bb21]

Don't CrossCountry and East Midlands use trolleys? Are you saying they aren't Intercity services?

They do, and what a load of awful offerings they both provide.

I often buy the proper coffee sold on-board FGW services, mostly with something else as well. I very rarely bother with those trolleys which seemingly only serve up dishwater-like hot beverages.

And yet only 41% of the troops voted for strike action.

What proportion voted "no" and what proportion did not vote?

 

[Flamingo]

They do, and what a load of awful offerings they both provide.

I often buy the proper coffee sold on-board FGW services, mostly with something else as well. I very rarely bother with those trolleys which seemingly only serve up dishwater-like hot beverages.



What proportion voted "no" and what proportion did not vote?

I'm also trying to find out if all RMT members were balloted, as I think certain grades, eg Drivers, were not balloted. I'm pretty sure that the 2700 RMT members referred to in the FGW briefings includes all RMT members in the company, not all ballots sent out.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I often buy the proper coffee sold on-board FGW services, mostly with something else as well. I very rarely bother with those trolleys which seemingly only serve up dishwater-like hot beverages.

Largely because they use lukewarm water to do instant coffee. Quality filter coffee would be a better way to go on trolleys. Or even a battery-powered Nespresso machine or similar (the Swiss trolleys use something like this).

 

[thelongestroad]

I supported RMT action at PNZ depot,

Most RMT members cringed at that one, and many many wondered how we could go about getting our membership fees rebated.