Deepgreen
Established Member
For "university" - often read 'college/academy', etc. Don't mistake attendance at further education establishments for a genuine increase in intelligence.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal
- Thread starter hornbyfan99
- Start date
- Status
For "university" - often read 'college/academy', etc. Don't mistake attendance at further education establishments for a genuine increase in intelligence.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
That was me following the tack of the Brexiteers coming up with a cute soundbite. I have not got a plan worked out yet
What on earth does university education have to do with intelligence? The drivers tests are for innate skills rather than things you pick up through university, that's why anyone can get the job off the street from any walk of life.
If anything I'd suggest being a decent guard requires more intelligence and 'life skills' than being a driver, as you end up having to work your way through more varied situations with the ever variable human factor. Companies nowadays want their drivers to effectively drive like robots in a set way with good reaction skills and a bit of common sense. That's not to dismiss the driver's job, far from it, but the two jobs require similar skillsets in some ways (calm under pressure, logical reasoning and all that) and in other ways totally different so good candidates for one may not be for the other. From my experience though I'd exclude more drivers from guards positions than I would guards from drivers.
As an example, I was recently working a train which couldn't get a brake release. Having conferred with the driver, checked for passcoms and MCBs and the usual, they called for a fitter. I happened to notice the main res air had dropped to slightly below the threshold for brake release (the train was full and standing and I reckon blowing the airbags up had just dipped it below) so I got the driver to switch on the compressor speed up and lo and behold, away we went. Either of us could have noticed that and sorted it and it doesn't require a brain surgeons qualification, just logical reasoning and working as a team we cracked it with minimal delay.
However on an other occasion I was working a train with a passenger having a nervous breakdown having just been told their parent had been found dead and then lost their phone signals. I put in place various processes to ensure their well-being and generally took pretty good care of them (despite her state she was kind enough to write a letter to my manager thanking me a little while later). I even, despite some folks shrieking about never touching other humans in case you have fingers chopped off and get thrown in prison, gave her a hug and held her for a while. Train drivers are not necessarily assessed on those kind of direct people skills, particularly in situations that are as distressing as any other emergency, and indeed in plenty of cases I know those people skills just aren't there.
I would also far rather have a driver who has lived a bit of life and gained experience as something like a police officer or a soldier, or even a train guard (
) than someone straight out of university.Deepgreen
Established Member
What on earth does university education have to do with intelligence? The drivers tests are for innate skills rather than things you pick up through university, that's why anyone can get the job off the street from any walk of life.
If anything I'd suggest being a decent guard requires more intelligence and 'life skills' than being a driver, as you end up having to work your way through more varied situations with the ever variable human factor. Companies nowadays want their drivers to effectively drive like robots in a set way with good reaction skills and a bit of common sense. That's not to dismiss the driver's job, far from it, but the two jobs require similar skillsets in some ways (calm under pressure, logical reasoning and all that) and in other ways totally different so good candidates for one may not be for the other. From my experience though I'd exclude more drivers from guards positions than I would guards from drivers.
As an example, I was recently working a train which couldn't get a brake release. Having conferred with the driver, checked for passcoms and MCBs and the usual, they called for a fitter. I happened to notice the main res air had dropped to slightly below the threshold for brake release (the train was full and standing and I reckon blowing the airbags up had just dipped it below) so I got the driver to switch on the compressor speed up and lo and behold, away we went. Either of us could have noticed that and sorted it and it doesn't require a brain surgeons qualification, just logical reasoning and working as a team we cracked it with minimal delay.
However on an other occasion I was working a train with a passenger having a nervous breakdown having just been told their parent had been found dead and then lost their phone signals. I put in place various processes to ensure their well-being and generally took pretty good care of them (despite her state she was kind enough to write a letter to my manager thanking me a little while later). I even, despite some folks shrieking about never touching other humans in case you have fingers chopped off and get thrown in prison, gave her a hug and held her for a while. Train drivers are not necessarily assessed on those kind of direct people skills, particularly in situations that are as distressing as any other emergency, and indeed in plenty of cases I know those people skills just aren't there.
I would also far rather have a driver who has lived a bit of life and gained experience as something like a police officer or a soldier, or even a train guard (
There's a lot to like in here (and BTW, I'm genuinely not commenting on the relative intelligence requirements of drivers and guards - both are vital parts of the railway operation).
Please tell me if this is correct.
A train is travelling along the line between Littlehampton and Brighton on the line designated for Brighton bound traffic. The train hits a large bull who has found himself on the track. The train doesn't derail but the impact damages the GSMR and the driver is incapicitated.
An onboard supervisor is on the train and after getting no response from the driver via the Cab to Cab radio. Makes an announcement to advise passengers to remain calm and that they are going to carry out necessary emergency procedures.
The OBS knowing that trains are most likely to come from behind puts down the TCOCs and dets at the necessary places and as soon as they find one makes an emergency call from a trackside phone be it signal post lineside etc
If the train had been travelling the wrong way up the down line etc then surely the driver could communicate this to the OBS before setting of in that direction. So they know it is best to lay protection in front of the train.
Sorry but I don't see how you would need route knowledge in this situation
A train is travelling along the line between Littlehampton and Brighton on the line designated for Brighton bound traffic. The train hits a large bull who has found himself on the track. The train doesn't derail but the impact damages the GSMR and the driver is incapicitated.
An onboard supervisor is on the train and after getting no response from the driver via the Cab to Cab radio. Makes an announcement to advise passengers to remain calm and that they are going to carry out necessary emergency procedures.
The OBS knowing that trains are most likely to come from behind puts down the TCOCs and dets at the necessary places and as soon as they find one makes an emergency call from a trackside phone be it signal post lineside etc
If the train had been travelling the wrong way up the down line etc then surely the driver could communicate this to the OBS before setting of in that direction. So they know it is best to lay protection in front of the train.
Sorry but I don't see how you would need route knowledge in this situation
Yes very true ok then the OBS firsts goes to investigate the problem and makes an emergency call from the nearest phone to connect with a signaller. Please explain how route knowledge means you know whether to protect the line you are on or the opposite one (I am just interested) Surely traffic flow is going to be similar on both lines in the scenario I have mentioned.
BestWestern
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,736
The OBS will be unlikely to do anything other than ring control on his mobile. They won't be going trackside, at least not in the long run, as that means training them, having them safety critical, and generally treating them with some degree of respect as frontline operational staff. Not the plan. I presume you meant 'Guard'...
BestWestern
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,736
A train has at least four sets of TCOCs (two in each cab). Route knowledge may dictate that you obtain further sets where reasonably available, to provide immediate protection for further lines. Equally, it may dictate that on one of the lines a train is unlikely and/or might approach at reduced speed, etc etc. The crux is that you need an idea of where you are and what's around you, rather than just running about trying to protect in more places than you can be at any one time. There are also junctions to consider.
As an example, take Wootton Basset Junction - site of the infamous West Coast SPAD. There are four main lines, two from Bristol Parkway and two from Chippenham, and an up loop. An obstruction on any of the mains is a very urgent consideration indeed. The loop is considerably less demanding of your attention. There is one of you, and you can only be stood on one line placing clips at a time. Somebody without route knowledge might waste two minutes clipping the loop, meanwhile you have high speed trains bowling along the main lines.
The other side of Chippenham we have Thingley Junction. There are, again, high speed main lines to Bristol, and there is the diverging Melksham road, a relatively low speed single line on which a train will approach the junction from Melksham at low speed. Again, your route knowledge tells you where those clips want to be going first.
Last edited:
The OBS will be unlikely to do anything other than ring control on his mobile. They won't be going trackside, at least not in the long run, as that means training them, having them safety critical, and generally treating them with some degree of respect as frontline operational staff. Not the plan. I presume you meant 'Guard'...
Didn't Mr Horton say to the select committee that OBS staff will have training in what to do in the event of an emergency?
That is very vague though. It could range from full PTS and protection of line training to "this is how you operate an egress handle and evacuate a train". I somewhat suspect that it'll be more like the latter.
As an example, it may be something like this old FGW video about on train safety: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slZLy9Rx0uQ
Last edited:
Yes but that could just mean they are trained in how to make an emergency call to the signaller. They are going to be non-essential customer service hosts.
Last edited:
BestWestern
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,736
The same Mr Horton who has led a deeply dishonest smear campaign against his own staff, and has repeatedly rubbished their valid concerns about long term job security without offering anything that suggests the likely outcome is anything other than job losses.
I wouldn't put too much faith into his words myself.
I wasn't being insulting. I was merely pointing out that there's already a process in place for moving guards to drivers and that those who could and wanted to be drivers already had the chance to take action.
But if you'd rather keep that giant chip on your shoulder, you're welcome.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I accept your correction.
Last edited:
BestWestern
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,736
The scenario was intended merely as an example to illustrate the principle. I wouldn't expect the poster to have knowledge of where is TC and where is axle counters, or to appreciate the differences that brings to the use of TCOCs.
As you may or may not be aware, train crew are still generally trained to deploy clips as a first action; there is not yet a clear distinction between TC areas and axle counters (rightly or wrongly). I suspect this is to prevent the obvious scenario of confusion leading to clips not being placed when they could or should have been.
I would suggest that your comment was likely to be insulting to current Southern Conductors, whom you implied must all have tried and failed to become Drivers. Common sense would presumably suggest to most that even if 100% of Southern's Conductors eventually went on to qualify as Drivers, there would still be current Conductors backfilling the jobs of the previous crop.
No chips here, but do try to consider how your words may be received by others in what is already a very sensitive debate.
Last edited:
The Government doesn't need to do bugger all. The queue for Drivers jobs is out the front door and round the back. Any qualification they have means nothing. You have to pass much much more than a medical.
The assessment process is the same for everyone. There is no special way in or special process to move Guards to Drivers. There is a single process for every single applicant. Everyone MUST undertake the assessments. It isn't a case of giving people the job or providing the opportunity, that is simply not possible.
There is a whole sub forum dedicated to people trying to get into the industry. I suggest those that believe it is as simple to get given a job or given the opportunity, take a good look at those threads to see how the process actually works.
If anything an internal applicant may be looked upon slightly favourable in an application sift and potentially may get past a DMI better but in no way whatsoever can they be simply brought into the role without going through the assessments. If anything, internal applicants do not do so well on the assessments and often do not pass the interview because of their existing work records.
The problem with recruiting anyone as future drivers is the lack of Driver Instructors for the practical training and the lack of trained drivers to allow the route learning programmes to get back on track.
Even if every train was DOO the cancellations and delay levels would be way above acceptable.
Even if every train was DOO the cancellations and delay levels would be way above acceptable.
If that's true then that's a large part of the reason why the industry is struggling with low staff morale/ motivation etc,
Following privatisation management genuinely had a fresh opportunity to change the workplace culture for the better, but in most cases they couldn't be bothered, it was far easier for them just to sit back, do as little as possible to keep the peace whilst getting well paid to run trains,
Last edited:
Internal applicants understand that there is a process to go through and there is a high failure rate. Low morale isn't coming from not being able to change your job.
All we do all day is to try our best to help the passengers, we generally work hard and at extreme ends on the clock, tired, hungry and dying for a loo. The very people we try to help are constantly against us.
We say DOO is unsafe but everyone else, especially outsiders are saying yeah its great and Guards cause train cancellations so yeah they should lose their jobs and move with the times. Management do everything they can to take your job at any moment. The slightest ****up and you can be out. The industry reminds us almost daily that we can go to jail for doing our jobs and potentially kill people, yet DOO is safe.
Policies coming out your ass, sign for everything, complete blame culture, micro managed, **** uniform, crap facilities and a bare minimum PNB in a **** hole of a kitchen.
On top of all that we are considered overpaid and money grabbing and god help us if we want a day off.
Yep its because I can't get a Drivers job :roll:
You're imputing things into what I wrote, just like Worst Western.
As I understand it, conductors are able to take assessment even when there are not vacancies, so that they can apply, having already passed assessment, when there are vacancies. This is preferential treatment and it seems a damn good idea to me - not that it's down to Horton & Co.
Of course they have to pass the assessment. Stop raising straw men.
If they don't do so well during assessments, it isn't totally surprising. External applicants are sifted before testing.
Last edited:
the sniper
Established Member
- Joined
- 4 Sep 2007
- Messages
- 3,498
You're imputing things into what I wrote, just like Worst Western.
As I understand it, conductors are able to take assessment even when there are not vacancies, so that they can apply, having already passed assessment, when there are vacancies. This is preferential treatment and it seems a damn good idea to me - not that it's down to Horton & Co.
Of course they have to pass the assessment. Stop raising straw men.
If they don't do so well during assessments, it isn't totally surprising. External applicants are sifted before testing.
Is this just a Southern thing? Can anybody confirm? Sure as heck doesn't work like that in my TOC...
Cab to Cab requires training on the specific traction- the company hasn't said OBS will have any.
"carry out emergency procedures" could range from calling Control on a mobile all the way through evacuation. Given the company's penchant for "phone a friend" I suspect it'll be the former.
"OBS knowing that trains are more likely to come from behind" How? That's part of route knowledge. OBS won't have that.
"TCOCs and dets at the necessary places" Requires route, traction, PTS, and rule book training which then has to be verified and assessed at regular intervals. One of the main reasons for transitioning to OBS is the cost savings from doing away with that.
"Emergency call" Requires PTS- they might have this, but AFAIK the company hasn't committed to it in writing.
"a trackside phone" Requires PTS and route knowledge.
"driver could communicate [wrong direction move] to the OBS" OBS is not a guard. Rules only require driver to communicate with guard.
Agree 100%. I never applied as I was quite happy with my lot as a conductor. I liked to be out and about, dealing with things, getting folks on their way, selling the correct ticket, fixing faults on the way, but at the same time knowing I was 100% full trained for when things go wrong and also knowing at all times where I was.. Sitting in a box sealed off from the world, did not appeal to me.
And now look where I am,
Last edited:
In the scenario I gave with 2 lines and the train traveling in the standard direction. It is highly likely the next train will be coming from behind.
I think the fact you have said drivers will not be communicating with OBS staff, is something that needs to be addressed
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
OBS having safety training is something that should have been negotiated between RMT and Southern.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Highly likely, perhaps but not certain. We don't make assumptions. Those assumptions are part of the problem, especially with many non railway staff. They are what get people into trouble.
Again you show your naivety - you assume meaningful negotiations were/are possible. GTR want to reduce the people costs. Why agree to expensive safety training?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I have decided: anywhere south of the Tees = Cockney.
Highly likely, perhaps but not certain. We don't make assumptions. Those assumptions are part of the problem, especially with many non railway staff. They are what get people into trouble.
Again you show your naivety - you assume meaningful negotiations were/are possible. GTR want to reduce the people costs. Why agree to expensive safety training?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I have decided: anywhere south of the Tees = Cockney.
Are you telling me that route knowledge training includes knowing the timetable for every day of the week?
It is nothing to do with naivety to expect that both parties should not have taken up this ridiculous we are not going to negotiate stance.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
I am sure that someone more experienced could explain more but if you break down your assisting locomotive/unit may arrive from the front - my point is you don't assume but confirm having double checked.
I agree but the real world isn't that simply, sadly.
- Status