ASLEF and RMT agree: no more DOO or DCO

[Jonfun]

Honest question from some self loading freight with no industry experience. I can see how DOO saves money in salaries etc (which I presume is why TOCs want to implement it?); but if you have a second member of staff on board anyway, what's the advantage of DCO or any other variant?

Drew

Cynically speaking, because if the Driver is already operating the doors under the direction of the Guard, then it's easier further on down the line for them to turn around and say well, the driver already pushes the buttons, why don't they do the safety checks and dispatch the train too?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Because as we're constantly reminded that we should not be dealing with any unnecessary distractions.

The one almost constant factor in the SPADs/SPARs that we've had on SWT is wait for it... Distraction.

It only takes someone to come up in the middle of a process and ask something that you then lose track of where you were and you make a mistake and...

How many times have you been doing something and the phone rings, someone calls/shouts for you, knocks on the door and you answer it and you forget what you were doing or go back & make a mistake. The thing is with office work, you can delete your mistakes with the backspace or delete key, our mistakes we can't!

 

[theironroad]

Depends where you work. It looks darker for those based nearer London than those of us out in the sticks, especially the non-commercial guys. Bringing in double my gross wages in ticket revenue on average per month really helps, but there's more to it than that. I can quite easily save a minute here or there by judicious use of my whistle, being ready for wheelchairs etc, being proactive with any issue that might impact on station dwell times etc and this can save SWT quite a decent sum over the course of a year-far in excess of my salary in fact. So I can justify my position, and that's before even considering the safety issues and customer service issue that are in my favour.

There may be some consolidation in the number of guard depots but I believe that commercial guards will still have a place on board in a few years although under a new job title and slightly different responsibilities maybe. As for the non commercial guys, they need to start adding value to their job, make themselves indispensable or else they will go the same way as the chaps on LO.

Add to that, a good guard can save loads of delays on desiros in how passcom,egress and call for aids are investigated and dealt with. As most CFA are due to toilet door problems and the driver gets no response, without immediate investigation the driver potentially has to stop out of course to walk back and investigate. Also, as by far most passcom and egress operations are false and people taking the proverbial, when the driver can get the guard to check it out asap, there is often no need to even reduce speed, let alone stop in the middle of nowhere to investigate and reset.

 

[40129]

Add to that. if you do get a door problem two heads can be better than one in resolving it without having to call maintenance for help

 

[ed1971]

The Northern guards revenue issue is easily solved by allowing them to work from any panel in the train and also putting in panels at every door (or alternate door) like they have on other TOCs. I work the same stock as Northern and have no issues with covering revenue and doing the doors in a timely manner, so it's more a case of the management at Northern preventing their guards from being more efficient.

This is how Northern's Class 319/3s are worked and seems to be working well.

During this period when Western countries are under the threat of terrorism, everyone needs to be on heightened alert. It is more secure to have a second member of staff on board a train, namely a guard/conductor.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is notable that German LHCS doesn't have a van as such - all coaches have a handbrake, and every set of doors has a UIC key slot to allow the others to be closed from there. Though the doors used to be released automatically on stopping, and are now driver released in some cases; the guard has never released them there.

You do sometimes get vans on Swiss trains but they are for cycle and luggage carriage, not for the guard who is always patrolling the passenger accommodation throughout the journey, operating doors from any passenger door he sees fit.

 

[83G/84D]

Honest question from some self loading freight with no industry experience. I can see how DOO saves money in salaries etc (which I presume is why TOCs want to implement it?); but if you have a second member of staff on board anyway, what's the advantage of DCO or any other variant?

Drew

The second member of staff on board is currently trained to a high standard to operate doors, know what to do in emergency situations and in case of trains breaking down etc. Taking that responsibility away from the other member of staff saves training costs. If they are doing non "safety critical" roles the TOC will probably want to pay them less or employ agency staff on zero hours contracts.

Not saying this is what would happen but it would not suprise me if it is suggested / proposed.

As an example some stations have gateline staff employed by outside companies (i.e not by the main TOC) I bet they are not paid the same as TOC staff or have the same responsibilities.

 

[hounddog]

So what happens then with a DOO service and a wheelchair passenger turns up? I'm not getting out of my cab, especially inside the M25, I've seen kids with weapons on some of the stations & I could be attacked. Sorry, the wheelchair user would be staying on the platform, especially as the majority of stations (West Byfleet-Esher, Chessington line, Epsom line stations) are unstaffed after mid afternoon/early evening.

But you're quite happy for a guard - or indeed the wheelchair passenger - to face those dangers?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

How much work is involved with retrofiting guards panels on stock that has never had guards panels, to every door (or at least one door on each side)?

 

[313103]

As for the non commercial guys, they need to start adding value to their job, make themselves indispensable or else they will go the same way as the chaps on LO.

On LO the former Guards did exactly that, yet it still didnt stop TfL from dispensing with us.

 

[Carntyne]

But you're quite happy for a guard - or indeed the wheelchair passenger - to face those dangers?

The driver's there to drive the train. Not miscellaneous tasks outwith the cab. They have enough to deal with.

 

[Sleepy]

No TOC will thank any member of staff for putting themselves in danger of attack for any reason.

 

[Carlisle]

Would this be a good time to mention that the ASLEF DOO charter (or whatever it's called) states that all current DOO services and routes will be revisited from time to time to see if DOO operation is still appropriate, now bearing in mind the increase in passenger numbers on most DOO routes I wonder whether a revisit might be a good idea?

If additional on train staff are required in the future on some current DOO services I'd think it's far more likely they'd be very similar to the Javelin OBMs role rather than a return to the traditional guard dispatched style of operation

 

[notadriver]

If additional on train staff are required in the future on current DOO services I'd think it's far more likely they'd be very similar to the Javelin OBMs role rather than a return to the traditional guard dispatched style of operation

Why in the future would they be similar to the Javelin OBM rather than a traditional guard ? OBMs are on 30k+. Conductors who currently do doors get less. I can't see OBMs on other trains getting conductors money without having control of the doors.

 

[Carlisle]

Why in the future would they be similar to the Javelin OBM rather than a traditional guard ? .

Because that allows the railway to retain the operational advantages of the DOO system whilst having a trained second member of staff more available for customer care or emergencies etc

 

[notadriver]

I don't understand. What operational advantages does a Javelin train with an OBM have over a traditional guarded train service ?

 

[Domh245]

*In theory* DOO services have marginally less dwell time, as they don't need to spend precious seconds waiting for local doors to open/close, bells, etc. I think there may be other savings that come from driver operated doors as well

 

[Phil.]

Put it like this it's going to cost mega millions to implement (on SWT) anyway.

You're going to have to:

1. Guarantee 100% coverage, 100% of the time on GSM-R, it's currently nowhere near that.

2. Reinstall all of the door controls & wiring looms on all of the 455s.

3. Program all of the 444/450's to use the internal door buttons by the drivers position.

4. Install thousands of HD CCTV cameras, HD colour monitors & vandalproof mirrors on all of the platforms.

5. Pay off all of the guards.

6. Retrain all of the drivers on all of the procedures

All of that's going to cost serious millions and ultimately who's going to be paying for it? Simple... YOU, the farepayer.

Then you have the thorny issue of who's going to protect a train involved in an accident where the driver is incapacitated, especially if it involves a fire or HT cables carrying anywhere between 750 & 25kV.

We also know that the GSM-R isn't failure proof too, because that derailment in Kent, where the train hit & killed a cow, disabled it and it was only the fast actions of the driver using a mobile stopped it escalating into something a lot bigger.

So far they've been lucky with DOO-P, but statistically one day a major incident will occur and people will get killed because they didn't know what to do and got out of the train and got owned by a passing train or fallen cable.

Hey, never mind most are just expendable office bods. Meh!

None of the above is any reason not to install DOO over the SWT suburban system. DOO has been in operation for many years both here and elsewhere without any significant problems that happened when/where trains were operating with a Guard. I can think of two incidents that immediately come to mind involving a train with a guard in charge. The oft mentioned incident with the cow of Kent would have been the same if the train had been carrying a Guard or not. For the last 25+ years people keep on about the "what if" situation with fires, cables etc. Well , given the number of journeys made over the last 25 years between Brighton and Bedford (let alone all of the other DOO routes) gives credence to DOO operation.
Keep a passenger assist person on the train but the traditional Guard's job disappeared long ago with the introduction of radios and Track Circuit Block signalling.

 

[The Ham]

The way SWT's works is a good model to follow where their guards patrol the trains. I don't recall any time when they haven't been out and about late at night (not to say it doesn't happen) as this reassures normal passengers. By reassuring the majority it limits the likelihood of there being a problem as the late night trains are/become fairly well used.

Compare this to a TOC where (due to having to control doors from the back cab) there is a risk that the guard wil opt to stay in the back cab (especially with only a few minutes between stops). Not only does this not reassure passengers but if there is a greater perception that tickets won't be checked then it can make it more likely that undesirables could be on the train in the first place.

 

[hounddog]

The driver's there to drive the train. Not miscellaneous tasks outwith the cab. They have enough to deal with.

But that wasn't his argument. His argument was 'I'm staying in the cab because I'm afraid I might get attacked' but he's happy for the wheelchair passenger or the guard to face that 'danger'.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

A driver's duty is to the train, not those on the platform.

A guards duty is to the train and those on it.

 

[plastictaffy]

They might have agreed it in principle, but if the TOC's want it, they'll get it, and blow the cost.

 

[talldave]

I don't understand. What operational advantages does a Javelin train with an OBM have over a traditional guarded train service ?

The OBM has more time to spout patronising drivel over the PA, in my experience.

 

[cactustwirly]

Well the DfT has agreed to

overall resource savings of 37% by 2019-20, reducing the subsidy paid to rail franchises

Particularly for Northern, they will need to look at how they could save money without affecting the level of service, and DOO/DCO looks very attractive to meet these savings.

Which do you prefer? A reduction in services, DOO on suitable lines(eg: Airedale & Wharfedale lines) or a reduction in Drivers and Guards pay.

 

[SPADTrap]

But that wasn't his argument. His argument was 'I'm staying in the cab because I'm afraid I might get attacked' but he's happy for the wheelchair passenger or the guard to face that 'danger'.

The dangers that train crew can face is perhaps for another thread. What you're not allowed to express is ill informed insulting things like your previous comment.

 

[Hadders]

I think it's inevitable that the role of guards will change. My personal view is that the 2nd member of staff should primarily be there for the security and reassurance of passengers.

I do find it strange that we have trains 1 and 2 car trains running on lightly used branch lines with 2 members of staff on board whereas on the other hand we have 12 car trains running on mainline services with in excess of 1,000 passengers on board that are driver only.

Seems the wrong way round to me.

 

[northwichcat]

Honest question from some self loading freight with no industry experience. I can see how DOO saves money in salaries etc (which I presume is why TOCs want to implement it?); but if you have a second member of staff on board anyway, what's the advantage of DCO or any other variant?

If you look at my local line (The Mid-Cheshire line) on an off-peak service between Chester and Manchester, the conductor can easily manage revenue duties up to Greenbank but then you start getting higher loadings and stations close together. The worse one being Hale to Altrincham, there's a significant number of people who board at Hale and alight at Altrincham - not everyone who boards at Hale, alights at Altrincham but the conductor has no idea who is alighting at the next station. Normally conductors don't even attempt to check tickets between Hale and Altrincham and if they do they can only usually manage 1/4 of the train by the time they've got door duties to do at both Hale and Altrincham. Then between Navigation Rd and Stockport the conductor probably has enough time to do full ticket inspections at least twice.

So what's the solution?
- More TVMs and penalty fares (as suggested further up the thread) but that would cost hundreds of thousands per line to implement.
- A third member of staff on the train that would probably cost as much as the TVMs in the short term and more in the long term. You could have the 3rd person only part of the line but then they'd probably spend a lot of time waiting at intermediate stations for the next service in the opposite direction.
- DCO. No extra staffing costs and less lost revenue. How much DCO would cost to implement is debatable. While there's costs involved in making existing trains and stations suitable for DCO, money has just been spent changing 20 of the 319s so that conductors can release the doors instead of drivers.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well the DfT has agreed to
Particularly for Northern, they will need to look at how they could save money without affecting the level of service, and DOO/DCO looks very attractive to meet these savings.

Which do you prefer? A reduction in services, DOO on suitable lines(eg: Airedale & Wharfedale lines) or a reduction in Drivers and Guards pay.

In the case of the Northern franchise spec it has been based on DCO being introduced but with new trains being introduced and more services, so as you say reversing the DCO plan may result in cutbacks to compensate for the alternative costing more.

A BBC news report on DOO/DCO a while back revealed there are regular Northern and TPE passengers who currently think the driver is the only member of staff on board. Ironically passengers may see DCO as an improvement opposed to a cutback as the 2nd member of staff would become more visible.

 

[Kite159]

Are the RMT still up in arms about the driver pressing the button to open the doors as its unsafe.

Better tell Scotland that with their very unsafe services where the driver operates the train with an onboard member of staff checks/sells tickets without the worry of having to stop every few minutes to walk back to the back to release the doors.

Or better tell Virgin & Cross Country who run trains where the driver opens (and closes in the case of voyagers) the doors.

The unions it seems are still stuck in the past unwilling to change even if change is for the benefit of passengers.

 

[47802]

For many People who don't work in the rail industry including myself It would seem to me that if the Unions think DOO and DCO is unsafe then they need to provide evidence to justify their case. If not then it just looks like purely a case of Union job protection trying to be disguised under a safety issue, and the Railways being there mainly for the benefit of their members, and I think many people will be of that latter view.

The fact the DOO operation has been running for many years on some services doesn't do a lot to help their stance in my view.

 

[geoffk]

On the local trains between Cork and Cobh/Midleton (sic) there is only the driver on board. On one occasion I saw him leave the cab at a station to help a wheelchair-bound passenger to board via the ramp. On another, the driver had restarted from an intermediate station and then stopped to allow a latecomer to board! Cant' see that happening in the UK.

The downside was very few ticket checks on board. Even at Cork station, checking was intermittent.