SWTH
Member
Two points in that text:
Under what circumstances would a train be cancelled? Because the guard needs to take a break due to being late in? Because the diagrammed Guard is ill and they don't want to pay a day's overtime to another guard? Until FGW clarify the circumstances under which a train would run without a guard, the general feeling among staff is that FGW would use this to reduce the staff they need.
This suggests the SETs are perfectly capable of being operated in the current manner of driver driving and guard controlling the doors. Therefore, why are FGW so keen to offload the job to the drivers? Could it be to do with eventually extending DOO?
We will only ever run a Super Express Train without a Train Manager when the only other alternative would be to cancel it. Even then, we do not propose extending this past areas where current staff agreements permit. An SET would not be operated without a safety competent Guard on board beyond Oxford, Banbury, Didcot Parkway or Bedwyn
Under what circumstances would a train be cancelled? Because the guard needs to take a break due to being late in? Because the diagrammed Guard is ill and they don't want to pay a day's overtime to another guard? Until FGW clarify the circumstances under which a train would run without a guard, the general feeling among staff is that FGW would use this to reduce the staff they need.
A fully competent, safety-critical Train Manager diagrammed on all SETs (The Driver would control doors, but the Train Manager would be competent to do so in the event of equipment failure)
This suggests the SETs are perfectly capable of being operated in the current manner of driver driving and guard controlling the doors. Therefore, why are FGW so keen to offload the job to the drivers? Could it be to do with eventually extending DOO?