Gatwick Express Industrial Relations

[HarleyDavidson]

Out of curiosity how 'tough', for lack of a better word, were the older systems like CSR and NRN in comparison to the modern GSMR?

CSR was pretty resilient, as long as the mcb's stayed set, what you see in the cab is just a HID/head unit, the brains of the system is elsewhere in the train.

I can't recall CSR going blank "out in the field" though. I was never trained on NRN.

 

[TheEdge]

So now we're banking on there not being a power failure, or some sort of other communications problem as part of the issue?

Bang on the head. DOO relies on everything in the driver's cab, including the driver, working perfectly in every situation regardless of the incident.

How much of the equipment in the cab of the 170 at Roudham do you reckon was working once it came to a halt?

 

[Antman]

A few points. DOO will not see ticket prices go down because of cost savings. The capital cost will write of savings to start with and any savings that do appear will find their way right to the DfT and the TOCs. Just like how ticket prices have dropped as offices are closed and you print your own or use e-tickets and smartcards, oh, wait...

The railways have, in the UK, spent 200 years trying to mitigate the dangers of travelling. Its why we have one of the safest rail networks in the world. Yes, developments and automation have seen some jobs go away over the years, firemen, secondmen and conductors (in the original sense) to name a few. But now we are facing a situation where trains are going to be deliberately become more dangerous. There are no incidents because they are stopped before they happen. On a daily basis trains are stopped by guards when someone runs up and gets against the train, or when someone gets trapped in the door. DOO looses that, the moment the driver looses sight of mirrors or screens anything can happen. There is a fairly recent one from GWR land where someone was dragged and injured on a DOO service.

It will happen, one day a person or people will die, it will have been avoidable, but they will die. People will self evacuate onto a third rail, someone will be dragged under a train, people will end up in front of a train. To the people in this thread who like to pretend there isn't an issue hope it isn't you or someone you care about who is that incident.

People will die because there is no guard on board? It's far more likely somebody will die from a medical condition because there isn't a doctor on board but where do we draw the line? And in the unlikely event of a train having to be evacuated between stations are passengers really going to wait patiently for the guard to get to their carriage or are they going to self evacuate?

 

[cjmillsnun]

Maybe, but given that the SWT franchise is "profitable" for the DfT anyway, any increase is going to be fairly small and so probably wouldn't be the risk in lost tickets as fare dodging increases.

There are quite a few stations with no staff for much of the day, some with two entrances. Is it better to have staff at each station all day or is it better to have staff on trains all day? I would suggest the latter, as 4 staff (guards) can cover all the stations on a service which takes an hour end to end on a half hour frequency, yet the same number of staff could only cover 4 stations (maybe a few more if they are being paid less, but then they could need more than one per station).

There are a number of non commercial guards in SWT. Their job has nothing to do with revenue.

 

[the sniper]

How much of the equipment in the cab of the 170 at Roudham do you reckon was working once it came to a halt?

To be fair, being a 170, half the stuff in the cab was probably knackered prior to the accident...

 

[cjmillsnun]

Thats impressive, how do you manage that, given reality and the universe exists in 3 dimensions?

To see in 3D you need stereo vision. If you are blind in one eye, you will see in 2D
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

People will die because there is no guard on board? It's far more likely somebody will die from a medical condition because there isn't a doctor on board but where do we draw the line? And in the unlikely event of a train having to be evacuated between stations are passengers really going to wait patiently for the guard to get to their carriage or are they going to self evacuate?

People could get seriously injured. A hand trapped in a door could well result in a serious crush injury.

 

[Sprinter153]

You are talking about the same GSM-R radios which aren't shockproof and which won't normally have been specified with a back-up battery pack ?

If the GSM-R radio hasn't shaken its internals apart and switched off, and if the unit is in an area with acceptable reception, then it's possible to give messages via the GSM-R set to the passengers.

The GSM-R radio sets are not sufficiently reliable to be used in this manner though, no matter what Siemens, Network Rail, RAIB and ORR say.

Interestingly in these parts it's in the Guards' competence cycle to be assessed on using GSM-R in this way in the event of PA failure. I've never found unregistered GSM-R that useful, though as I'm HST trained I largely have to do without anyway!

 

[XC90]

Well I rather think the driver is being hung out to dry here! If he's following the legitimate instructions of his Union then the issue is less 'he refused to open the doors' and more 'the Union and TOC couldn't reach an agreement and the poor sod in the cab is caught in the middle!'.

Who employs the driver and gives him/her instructions? If it's the union, fair enough.

 

[infobleep]

Thats impressive, how do you manage that, given reality and the universe exists in 3 dimensions?

Quite easily. I have other cues the show things arw further Way but generally the TV picture looks the same as in real life.

When going to the cinema for a 3D film, all pictures line up and don't still doubled up after putting on the glasses on. However it looks no more 3D than a 2D film.

My left eye is weaker than my right but not to the point of needing glasses.

It's unusual to not have stereoscopic vision but I don't.

I did an eye test once for some dyslexic research. Of all the pictures they asked me to say where 3D or not, I missed the two that were and picked out one that wasn't.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Agent_c]

Who employs the driver and gives him/her instructions? If it's the union, fair enough.

Although the company employs the driver, the driver has a greater duty beyond his duty to the company. He has a statutory duty to the public and the country to ensure that his operation of the train is in a safe manner... If he doesn't do so, he's not risking his job... He's risking at best his freedom, and at worst his own life.

Part of the Union's role is to help the worker ensure that they are safe and able to execute this duty. Don't get me wrong, this is the company's job too, but the company has other competing interests - Shareholders, Financial performance and the like - whereas the Union is there purely for its members.

 

[bnm]

To see in 3D you need stereo vision. If you are blind in one eye, you will see in 2D

Not necessarily true. Blindness in one eye doesn't always result in a complete loss of stereopsis. Provided the brain isn't also affected, depth perception can be no worse than those with 20/20 vision. Even when depth perception is degraded it is rarely totally lacking. Around a 10-20% loss on average. The brain is remarkably adept at filling in the missing information from the lost eye.

I don't know of the rules for UK trains drivers or guards but there are definitely commercial airline pilots with one eye.

 

[the sniper]

People will die because there is no guard on board? It's far more likely somebody will die from a medical condition because there isn't a doctor on board but where do we draw the line? And in the unlikely event of a train having to be evacuated between stations are passengers really going to wait patiently for the guard to get to their carriage or are they going to self evacuate?

A couple of months ago we had the Pantograph come off one of our units, this created a big flash, a big racket and reduced the passengers to emergency lighting. When the train stopped the Driver called the Guard to say one of the doors had been opened. The Guard immediately looked out of the cab window and saw a couple of idiots stood in the four foot of the opposite running line! They'd egressed the rear set of doors on the rear carriage, while all the other passengers remained on the train. The Guard told them, in no uncertain terms, to get off the line and directed them to a position of safety. The two (maybe three) of them were together and were on the phone to 999 telling them they thought a bomb had gone off on the train! Luckily there was no train coming in the opposite direction while the driver was contacting the signaller!

Maybe you can't always stop people getting out, but you can try and control them if they do or dissuade them from leaving in the first place.

 

[XC90]

Although the company employs the driver, the driver has a greater duty beyond his duty to the company. He has a statutory duty to the public and the country to ensure that his operation of the train is in a safe manner... If he doesn't do so, he's not risking his job... He's risking at best his freedom, and at worst his own life.

Part of the Union's role is to help the worker ensure that they are safe and able to execute this duty. Don't get me wrong, this is the company's job too, but the company has other competing interests - Shareholders, Financial performance and the like - whereas the Union is there purely for its members.

I see now. So the company are asking drivers to take out sets which are unsafe and the union are fighting them? Good on them, I don't want to be on a dangerous train.

How did I the next train get on? Was the 12 car just an experiment early in the morning when there were less customers?

 

[Antman]

To see in 3D you need stereo vision. If you are blind in one eye, you will see in 2D
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


People could get seriously injured. A hand trapped in a door could well result in a serious crush injury.

Surely an accident like that would be as likely/unlikely with or without a guard?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I see now. So the company are asking drivers to take out sets which are unsafe and the union are fighting them? Good on them, I don't want to be on a dangerous train.

How did I the next train get on? Was the 12 car just an experiment early in the morning when there were less customers?

Unsafe? Presumably the company think otherwise?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I see now. So the company are asking drivers to take out sets which are unsafe and the union are fighting them? Good on them, I don't want to be on a dangerous train.

How did I the next train get on? Was the 12 car just an experiment early in the morning when there were less customers?

A couple of months ago we had the Pantograph come off one of our units, this created a big flash, a big racket and reduced the passengers to emergency lighting. When the train stopped the Driver called the Guard to say one of the doors had been opened. The Guard immediately looked out of the cab window and saw a couple of idiots stood in the four foot of the opposite running line! They'd egressed the rear set of doors on the rear carriage, while all the other passengers remained on the train. The Guard told them, in no uncertain terms, to get off the line and directed them to a position of safety. The two (maybe three) of them were together and were on the phone to 999 telling them they thought a bomb had gone off on the train! Luckily there was no train coming in the opposite direction while the driver was contacting the signaller!

Maybe you can't always stop people getting out, but you can try and control them if they do or dissuade them from leaving in the first place.

I suppose if they thought a bomb had gone off their actions were not unreasonable although common sense should dictate that standing on another running line isn't a good idea.

 

[TEW]

Not so much patrolling through the 455/456 trains though. It's to do with the way trains are dispatched I think.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

No reason guards shouldn't be patrolling 455s. There are door controls in all but 1 carriage on the 455/7s. There are some stations where dispatch has to be from a certain location, but that's the minority of stations. 456s are more difficult due to the lack of gangway.

 

[Southern Dvr]

Well that puts a different slant on it. No mention of train length. Indeed it is the standard BR era DOO agreement, with one amendment from 1997 re staffing of stations where DOO kit has failed.

However it is possible that there is a separate specific agreement that does detail it. If so, and if I were ASLEF, I would publish it to show all concerned what the issue actually is.

9. DOO services in excess of 10 cars.
A conductor should normally be provided unless there is service disruption. As per Company Council Agreement 04/06/09

 

[Robertj21a]

My understanding is that vast majority are in ASLEF and of the remainder the vast majority are in the RMT. It's a very very small minority that aren't in a Union at all (and I never quite understood why when you can get the protection of being in either one of two, relatively, powerful Unions).

Possibly because they prefer to be instructed by their line management rather than an intermediary ?

 

[infobleep]

No reason guards shouldn't be patrolling 455s. There are door controls in all but 1 carriage on the 455/7s. There are some stations where dispatch has to be from a certain location, but that's the minority of stations. 456s are more difficult due to the lack of gangway.

But there's no gangway on the 455s or at least not a public one.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[FlashingYellows]

Our last safety brief included a red video where it appeared that a guard would have been very helpful in quickly identifying an issue and possibly in preventing a very unfortunate death. However, without knowing the full facts of the incident, I'm not willing to speculate further than what the video showed. Some on here will possibly be better placed than me on the details.

Fires, collisions, etc are some of many scenarios which can happen on the railway and the presence of a second or in some cases the only remaining suitably trained and competent person can and will save lives, as the post above, without this people will die.

This is before the subject of dispatch and the extra responsibility placed on the driver. If people are willing to accept a railway which is less safe than the one they currently have, then they should accept that they use that railway at their own risk, unfortunately that is not the case and any additional risk is heaped on to the driver and is why they will fight to protect safety on the railway.

Would people be willing for me to come to their house, have the council forcibly remove safety features and then accept any responsibility for any harm I do to myself, not the council, not me, but you the householder? I then fancy a few drinks, go a bit overboard and take a few risks, still it's on you, not me...Maybe a bit of silly analogy, but the point sort of stands.

 

[DelayRepay]

People will die because there is no guard on board? It's far more likely somebody will die from a medical condition because there isn't a doctor on board but where do we draw the line? And in the unlikely event of a train having to be evacuated between stations are passengers really going to wait patiently for the guard to get to their carriage or are they going to self evacuate?

In the event of the driver being unable to act, the guard can ensure the power is turned off, ensure help is on the way and ensure trains on adjacent lines are stopped. I would say people are less likely to self evacuate en-mass if a guard is present (remember this is all about reducing probabilities, which will never be zero).

As for doctors, I would suggest that having a guard on board will help because he can do several things that a passenger couldn't do:
1. Use the PA to ask if there is a doctor on board
2. Assess the situation and determine the best place to stop the train
3. Ensure that the emergency services are going to meet the train at the right place

 

[ComUtoR]

9. DOO services in excess of 10 cars.
A conductor should normally be provided unless there is service disruption. As per Company Council Agreement 04/06/09

"Should normally" is not "must have"
"9. DOO services in excess of 10 cars" shows that there can be longer services and that it's safe to do so without a guard.

Sorry but that is a bit grey in my mind. Unless it's an absolute no then there will be plenty of wiggle room. For the Union naysayers you can see that they are flexible and conditions allow for exceptional circumstances and that the intention for trains to run. Sadly the mangement push those grey areas into absolute acceptance and to force through long term changes.

 

[TEW]

But there's no gangway on the 455s or at least not a public one.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

There is a gangway on 455s for staff use, so the guard has access to the whole train.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

They did try it in the past, but things like fire extinguishers, TC clips and other things like guards equipment went missing (what a surprise!):roll:, also the cab doors in the intermediate cabs were tampered with, so it got stopped.

 

[IKB]

There is a gangway on 455s for staff use, so the guard has access to the whole train.

On SW maybe, but on Southern 455s the corridor connection has been removed at the A and B end, so if units are in multiple the guard would have to alight at a station to move between units.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

People will die because there is no guard on board?

Yes. It's only a matter of time.

There's the possibility of more than enough going wrong to need the combined talents of both driver and guard to prevent a serious incident becoming a multiple fatality incident.

A derailment at a junction will require multiple lines to be protected, if you've caused an OLE dewirement or damaged the third rail, any evacuation will need to take into account the possibility of live lines. It could be a bridge, washed away by flooding, damaged by a bridge strike or your own derailment.

Evacuation might be unavoidable - maybe you've ripped a fuel tank or the transformer open and there's a fire started underneath the train, maybe sparks from the third rail or from a hot exhaust has set the embankment where the train has come to rest alight.

The driver can't try and stop another train coming along at line speed and evacuate his train at the same time, passengers can't be left to evacuate themselves if there's track missing, live electric in the area, a fire ongoing or the possibility of another train coming through the section at high speed.

The incident has got a whole lot worse if the GSM-R radio set(s) have stopped working, as we now know is a very real possibility.

That's all assuming the driver hasn't been incapacitated. That's assuming the driver's cab didn't hit a bridge parapet, OLE mast, signal gantry or another train during the accident, and he's not either incapacitated or worse in the cab.

For me though, the biggest concern is increasing traffic - it's now more likely than at any time in recent history that in the event of a derailment with the offending unit fouling an adjacent line, it's going to be hit by another train. It's now more vital than ever before that a derailed unit is reported as quickly as possible to the signalling centre/box and lines blocked as quickly as possible.

That needs a driver and a guard.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Surely an accident like that would be as likely/unlikely with or without a guard?

SarahJ has already posted on this thread that she sees things a driver would not.

 

[notadriver]

People will die because there is no guard on board? It's far more likely somebody will die from a medical condition because there isn't a doctor on board but where do we draw the line? And in the unlikely event of a train having to be evacuated between stations are passengers really going to wait patiently for the guard to get to their carriage or are they going to self evacuate?

Antman from your posts I see you have a great interest in the railway generally particularly when it comes to operations. You're a bus driver - right ? Have you considered joining the railway ?

 

[YoungJohnson]

What does the driver do when there is some idiot larking around by the rearmost doors of a 10 / 12 coach train?

Presumably a guard can position himself much more appropriately to monitor such behaviour, shout warnings to stand clear, or intervene? How will time be saved if the driver has to get out of the cab, walk down and deal with it, then walk back, only to find they are doing it again, when he is out of sight?

With all the recent prosecutions of staff, it is not really surprisingly that drivers don't want the liability for drunks / idiots / misplaced larking around / late runners on top of everything else.

It seems laughable that we can subsidise the states of foreign railways through our franchising system, but anything that benefits our country, be it safer railways with guards or whatever has to be opposed in the name of austerity.

I cannot as a passenger think of a single reason why getting rid of guards is a good thing. DOO trains are overrun with idiots playing music and fare dodging all the time, and the assistance when things go wrong mid journey is non existent (and no I don't expect the driver to start sorting out connections, reassure passengers, deal with aggressive people, calm anger or whatnot).

 

[craigybagel]

At the risk of being accused of back seat moderating, might I suggest that this thread stick to discussing the issues here with Gatwick Express rather than turn into a general debate about DOO? The current situation is a dramatic escalation and as a guard I'd hate to see this thread get locked after it descends into the usual arguments when there are important things happening right now at one TOC that have implications for all of us stag? Apologies to the Mods if I'm stepping on toes here.

 

[BRblue]

Yes. It's only a matter of time.

There's the possibility of more than enough going wrong to need the combined talents of both driver and guard to prevent a serious incident becoming a multiple fatality incident.

A derailment at a junction will require multiple lines to be protected, if you've caused an OLE dewirement or damaged the third rail, any evacuation will need to take into account the possibility of live lines. It could be a bridge, washed away by flooding, damaged by a bridge strike or your own derailment.

Evacuation might be unavoidable - maybe you've ripped a fuel tank or the transformer open and there's a fire started underneath the train, maybe sparks from the third rail or from a hot exhaust has set the embankment where the train has come to rest alight.

The driver can't try and stop another train coming along at line speed and evacuate his train at the same time, passengers can't be left to evacuate themselves if there's track missing, live electric in the area, a fire ongoing or the possibility of another train coming through the section at high speed.

The incident has got a whole lot worse if the GSM-R radio set(s) have stopped working, as we now know is a very real possibility.

That's all assuming the driver hasn't been incapacitated. That's assuming the driver's cab didn't hit a bridge parapet, OLE mast, signal gantry or another train during the accident, and he's not either incapacitated or worse in the cab.

For me though, the biggest concern is increasing traffic - it's now more likely than at any time in recent history that in the event of a derailment with the offending unit fouling an adjacent line, it's going to be hit by another train. It's now more vital than ever before that a derailed unit is reported as quickly as possible to the signalling centre/box and lines blocked as quickly as possible.

That needs a driver and a guard.

+1 if only I could of put so eloquently.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Antman from your posts I see you have a great interest in the railway generally particularly when it comes to operations. You're a bus driver - right ? Have you considered joining the railway ?

I have sent Antman a PM but he has not replied although he has been online... perhaps he might like to read the private message and reply to me by PM.
I doubt he will though!