Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[Fincra5]

Unfortunately I can see the Mainline (BML) being a lost cause. Knew it when TLK allowed 12 Car DOO and GatEx / SN (drivers) were forced to drive 12 Car DOO.

As far as the OBS role goes... Look at the "Train Hosts" (VERY Similar Role) on TLK and GatEx and how long they lasted!

 

[highdyke]

No it isn't. It's about saving wages. There are no productivity savings to be made if you have a guaranteed OBS on every train on the same wage. The savings come from NOT having them on board.

Yes there are - reduced dwell times to run more services, deployment of staff to save cancellations and delay which the company has to pay out, faster training, greater flexibility, collecting and enforcing revenue instead of doing doors.

If they provide value, they will be there, if they don't they won't. The railway is not a job creation scheme, I'd rather have that cash spent on new services that provide jobs elsewhere on the network. No business should be doing things that does not add value, conversely getting rid of things that do provide it is equally daft. If they save their wages in revenue etc why would you get rid of them?

 

[infobleep]

Middle management is something of a bug bear for many but a lot of these people do do important jobs.
Many of these roles are of the type where you never notice anything being done if they are doing their job properly - becuase it is the sort of thing that is often not noticed until it isn't being done any more.

Like the lack of a guard in an emergency situation.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Tetchytyke]

Yes there are reduced dwell time run more services, deployment of staff to save cancellation and delay which the company has to pay out.

Dwell time savings aren't there, it makes no odds who shuts the doors for dwell time. The only saving is delay/cancellation.

As I said, the figures only stack up if the OBS isn't on the train.

The guards "provide value" now. The OBS role does not. It is deliberately designed to be of low value, so that it can be quietly disposed of in a year or two. Just ask the GatEx train hosts...

 

[ModernRailways]

Not sure if this has been posted yet but I do find it quite interesting!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37011066

He clearly cannot answer the question. He's a bloody good PR mouth though. Continually mentions the doors being the issue and wanting the best for customers.

I'd love to see a radio show (or TV show) with the RMT and Southern debating the matter tbh

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Also, I'm not sure this has been mentioned yet. But if there is disruption, and crew are displaced then surely both drivers and guards are displaced. Drivers don't teleport around the system. So during disruption, yes drivers can have their services changed, but surely a conductor can too?

Am I missing something here?

 

[absolutelymilk]

Also, I'm not sure this has been mentioned yet. But if there is disruption, and crew are displaced then surely both drivers and guards are displaced. Drivers don't teleport around the system. So during disruption, yes drivers can have their services changed, but surely a conductor can too?

Am I missing something here?

The driver and guard won't necessarily be going to the same train though, so there may be a driver ready waiting for a guard. Obviously there may be a guard ready waiting for a driver, but that isn't being discussed here!

 

[highdyke]

Dwell time savings aren't there, it makes no odds who shuts the doors for dwell time. The only saving is delay/cancellation.

As I said, the figures only stack up if the OBS isn't on the train.

The guards "provide value" now. The OBS role does not. It is deliberately designed to be of low value, so that it can be quietly disposed of in a year or two. Just ask the GatEx train hosts...

The Gat Ex goes from A - B and is slightly different.

 

[FordFocus]

Going up the food chain a little bit... Have the top bods at Go Ahead HQ said anything about this ongoing saga? Hearing that the franchise profit is severely been cut and I honestly wonder if they are considering pulling the plug or making changes at the top of GTR.

 

[PHILIPE]

Perhaps if the DFT were to say there would be an OBS on the train and that the train couldn't run without one and there would be one in any new franchise which they refused to commit to, it might make quite a load of difference in negotiations. There should be somebody on board for passenger's safety.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Going up the food chain a little bit... Have the top bods at Go Ahead HQ said anything about this ongoing saga? Hearing that the franchise profit is severely been cut and I honestly wonder if they are considering pulling the plug or making changes at the top of GTR.

If Govia pull the plug on GTR, it will damage them on LM and SE, and the new bids they are planning to do.
Management changes maybe - probably inevitable at some stage.
Presumably TL and GN are performing OK commercially, within GTR.
Detaching Southern from GTR at this point would be a nightmare.

 

[FordFocus]

Perhaps if the DFT were to say there would be an OBS on the train and that the train couldn't run without one and there would be one in any new franchise which they refused to commit to, it might make quite a load of difference in negotiations. There should be somebody on board for passenger's safety.

I agree. If I read a recent RMT press release correctly I think they hinted they were prepared to give ground on the dispatch process provided all parties agreed on a safe method of working at individual stations. This should satisfy the DfT and GTR goal of "spending more time with passengers". The conditions included a guarantee from GTR and I think DfT that the OBS staff numbers would not degrade over time and that all current training and safety would remain.

The fact that Horton has said trains can run without a OBS signals to me it's a thin edge of a wedge so that the numbers would degrade over time and ultimately the OBS grade would be consigned to history. The DfT want the network to go this way, look at recent franchises been let out. Northern are meant to be going down the DOO but that's looking unlikely now. The DOO concept has changed since the first agreements were made in the 1980s. It's now a much busier railways, the platforms are overcrowded, a claim and blame culture, trains are crammed and there's too much pressure lumbered on the driver especially when things go wrong. DOO was brought in to save money. Nothing to do with "enhancing the customer experience" or whatever tosh GTR PR want to churn out in press releases.

GTR are trying to do a backdoor deal with ASLEF for agreements on working of the new DOO area but I'd take an educated guess and say the drivers union have no real appetite to even talk about it. Not when it's cost the union a large sum of money in legal costs, a dispute regarding rostering around the revised timetable and other industrial matters.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If Govia pull the plug on GTR, it will damage them on LM and SE, and the new bids they are planning to do.
Management changes maybe - probably inevitable at some stage.
Presumably TL and GN are performing OK commercially, within GTR.
Detaching Southern from GTR at this point would be a nightmare.

Good point although National Express managed to hang on onto c2c when they bailed out of East Coast.

 

[Chrisgr31]

Judging from news reports today the RMT are rapidly losing public support.

The discussion on the Jeremy Vine show today didnt appear to be critical of the unions, and every report I have heard wehere passengers have been interviewed, those that support the guards have always been in the majority.

 

[JamesTT]

If a DOO incident did happen it would almost certainly be the driver who would get hung out to dry.
.

If they follow the designated procedure why would they be hung out to dry?

 

[Bromley boy]

If they follow the designated procedure why would they be hung out to dry?

The DOO procedure is not risk free. Monitors are far from perfect and subject to poor lighting, foliage, sunlight distortion, moisture etc. The cynical view is that if a trap and drag incident occurs, it's far easier for the TOC to blame it on the driver than to admit there are risks inherent with the procedure itself.

 

[JamesTT]

The DOO procedure is not risk free. Monitors are far from perfect and subject to poor lighting, foliage, sunlight distortion, moisture etc. The cynical view is that if a trap and drag incident occurs, it's far easier for the TOC to blame it on the driver than to admit there are risks inherent with the procedure itself.

Ok so in situations you mention above are there approved methods of preventing a trap and drag incident?

 

[Carlisle]

The guards "provide value" now. The OBS role does not. It is deliberately designed to be of low value, so that it can be quietly disposed of in a year or two. Just ask the GatEx train hosts...

I thought they'd confirmed the OBS till at the very least the end of the franchise , so where are you getting the idea of a year or two from?

 

[Fincra5]

Yes there are - reduced dwell times to run more services, deployment of staff to save cancellations and delay which the company has to pay out, faster training, greater flexibility, collecting and enforcing revenue instead of doing doors.

If they provide value, they will be there, if they don't they won't. The railway is not a job creation scheme, I'd rather have that cash spent on new services that provide jobs elsewhere on the network. No business should be doing things that does not add value, conversely getting rid of things that do provide it is equally daft. If they save their wages in revenue etc why would you get rid of them?

Dwell times won't be reduced at all. Not sure where you get that from. My reckoning if they'll be longer. Scanning a small screen with up to 12 (non-live), whilst potentially battling against poor lighting or sun glare. Then as a result maybe having to shut down the train to manually lock each coach out because you can't safely see all the carriages. - Yes thats much faster -

377's have a panel in each coach. Dispatch takes up a small amount of time. They are still able to do other duties inbetween. Its hardly a huge amount of time.

Anyways the more frequent stoppers, such as your West Worthings and Seafords will still be 313 operated so kinda moot point there.

On a side note... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/terrified-passengers-forced-to-flee-london-commuter-train-after-fire-breaks-out-on-board-a3315001.html

A DOO service where the driver was clearly occupied in dealing with the signaller (etc) that no one could look after the passengers earlier on.

 

[Bromley boy]

Ok so in situations you mention above are there approved methods of preventing a trap and drag incident?

Yes indeed. The simplest being, simply look back out of the window. This relies on having a straight platform of course, which is often not the case.

For a curved platform (or a train with more than 8 cars), it's bell the signaller up, key off, walk back to the last coach and take off the door release, walking coach by coach repeating the process back to the front of the train. Key on, DSD test, bell the signaller up to get the road back - easily 10 minutes delay.

Where it falls down is curved platforms during the rush hour where the enormous numbers of people getting on and off the train make it very hard to tell if that person standing right next to the doors eight coaches back is trapped, or simply standing close to the edge.

It is a far from perfect system - no driver would ever leave if they are unsure whether someone is trapped as the stakes are far to high. Job loss, a death on your conscience and a potential prison sentence. But take into account 100 station stops per shift, fatigue and the inevitable human error and mistakes can and do happen.

There is also a strong suspicion that blind spots can occur on monitors, which you will not be aware of unless you count each set of doors on your train (20 on a 10 car).

Quite a few locations on my network really should have bat and flag. The reason they don't, of course, is down to cost.

 

[Dave1987]

I thought they'd confirmed the OBS till at the very least the end of the franchise , so where are you getting the idea of a year or two from?

They have had other agreements they didn't like so renegaded on.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

On a side note... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/terrified-passengers-forced-to-flee-london-commuter-train-after-fire-breaks-out-on-board-a3315001.html

A DOO service where the driver was clearly occupied in dealing with the signaller (etc) that no one could look after the passengers earlier on.

Prime example of where a guard is so useful. Hope the RMT use this!

 

[Tetchytyke]

I thought they'd confirmed the OBS till at the very least the end of the franchise , so where are you getting the idea of a year or two from?

They promise lots of things. They promised lots of things to their GatEx train hosts and their Southern and South Eastern catering staff too.

You can gently nudge people towards the door without sacking them. Freezes on recruitment, wage freezes, etc etc. Anyone who can gets out.

If the OBS role still exists by the start of the next franchise I'll eat my hat. It'll be an untenable empty role long before then. It's specifically designed that way, and, as highdyke is explaining, they've already lined up their "no value" justification for sacking them as soon as they can.

 

[Carlisle]

They have had other agreements they didn't like so renegaded on.

Yes agreed they could quietly get away with it then, like other issues on a number of other TOCs I can think of, but given the amount of media coverage this whole sagas generated I doubt they'd be so brain dead as to break this one

 

[Domh245]

Yes agreed they could quietly get away with it then, like other issues on a number of other TOCs I can think of, but given the amount of media coverage this whole sagas generated I doubt they'd be so brain dead as to break this one

The general public can be quite quick to forget. Give it a year (the point at which GTR are proposing to hold a "review") and a lot of people will have already forgotten

 

[Tetchytyke]

given the amount of media coverage this whole sagas generated I doubt they'd be so brain dead as to break this one

I don't. The current fiasco will be chip wrappers next week. And what are the OBS staff going to do to enforce the promises? Go on strike? Nobody will notice.

I wouldn't cash Piero McCarthy's word at the bank, put it that way.

 

[Phil.]

The DOO procedure is not risk free. Monitors are far from perfect and subject to poor lighting, foliage, sunlight distortion, moisture etc. The cynical view is that if a trap and drag incident occurs, it's far easier for the TOC to blame it on the driver than to admit there are risks inherent with the procedure itself.

Having a Guard on the train is not risk free either. The cynical view is that the RMT realises that they have a flawed argument and are using safety scare tactics to try and win their case.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ok so in situations you mention above are there approved methods of preventing a trap and drag incident?

Yep. Driver closes doors and then gets out of cab to have another look. Train is delayed but the management are going to have to live with it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes indeed. The simplest being, simply look back out of the window. This relies on having a straight platform of course, which is often not the case.

For a curved platform (or a train with more than 8 cars), it's bell the signaller up, key off, walk back to the last coach and take off the door release, walking coach by coach repeating the process back to the front of the train. Key on, DSD test, bell the signaller up to get the road back - easily 10 minutes delay.

Why would you walk the length of the train? All you have to do is to walk as far as you can see the last coach. No platform is that curved where you cannot see the last door until you get there.

Where it falls down is curved platforms during the rush hour where the enormous numbers of people getting on and off the train make it very hard to tell if that person standing right next to the doors eight coaches back is trapped, or simply standing close to the edge.

It is a far from perfect system - no driver would ever leave if they are unsure whether someone is trapped as the stakes are far to high. Job loss, a death on your conscience and a potential prison sentence. But take into account 100 station stops per shift, fatigue and the inevitable human error and mistakes can and do happen.

There is also a strong suspicion that blind spots can occur on monitors, which you will not be aware of unless you count each set of doors on your train (20 on a 10 car).

Quite a few locations on my network really should have bat and flag. The reason they don't, of course, is down to cost.

............

 

[Bromley boy]

Having a Guard on the train is not risk free either. The cynical view is that the RMT realises that they have a flawed argument and are using safety scare tactics to try and win their case.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Yep. Driver closes doors and then gets out of cab to have another look. Train is delayed but the management are going to have to live with it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


............

If you can get a view of the train from standing outside the cab then yes, that is sufficient. In reality, in the locations you could do this it would be sufficient just to look back from the cab window. Even on a moderately curved platform you would need to walk three or four coaches back to see the back of the train. Not easy or pleasant, particularly in rush hour.

If you walk back more than one coach length from the front of the train you are required to key off, which means contacting the signaller first so that he can take the road away from you to prevent delay to other services.

Also add into the equation the unbelievably stupid things people do. Just this afternoon I had a woman run into the platform with a pram with the hustler alarm sounding and ram the pram into the doors to stop them closing. Of course I wouldn't have got interlock (and I saw her), but the recent Hayes and Harlington incident springs to mind where someone jammed their hand into the doors to stop closure and was dragged.

I can see both sides of the argument re DOO. What I don't like is Southern's mealy mouthed, cynical attempt to spin the proposed changes as an attempt to improve customer service. They do not care tuppence about safety or service. Just profits.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If you can get a view of the train from standing outside the cab then yes, that is sufficient. In reality, in the locations you could do this it would be sufficient just to look back from the cab window. On a heavily curved platform you would need to walk three or four coaches back to see the back of the train. Not easy or pleasant, particularly in rush hour.

If you walk back more than one coach length from the front of the train you are required to key off, which means contacting the signaller first so that he can take the road away from you to prevent delay to other services.

Also add into the equation the unbelievably stupid things people do. Just this afternoon I had a woman run into the platform with a pram with the hustler alarm sounding and ram the pram into the doors to stop them closing. Of course I wouldn't have got interlock (and I saw her), but the recent Hayes and Harrington incident springs to mind where someone jammed their hand into the doors to stop closure and was dragged.

I can see both sides of the argument re DOO. What I don't like is Southern's mealy mouthed, cynical attempt to spin the proposed changes as an attempt to improve customer service. They do not care tuppence about safety or service. Just profits.

And to add. If we key off we are required to walk back and lock out the train. It may seem silly, but that's what we are required to do and the minute you deviate from the required procedure, you're giving them rope to hang you with.

 

[Phil.]

If you can get a view of the train from standing outside the cab then yes, that is sufficient. In reality, in the locations you could do this it would be sufficient just to look back from the cab window. On a heavily curved platform you would need to walk three or four coaches back to see the back of the train. Not easy or pleasant, particularly in rush hour.

If you walk back more than one coach length from the front of the train you are required to key off, which means contacting the signaller first so that he can take the road away from you to prevent delay to other services.

Also add into the equation the unbelievably stupid things people do. Just this afternoon I had a woman run into the platform with a pram with the hustler alarm sounding and ram the pram into the doors to stop them closing. Of course I wouldn't have got interlock (and I saw her), but the recent Hayes and Harrington incident springs to mind where someone jammed their hand into the doors to stop closure and was dragged.

I can see both sides of the argument re DOO. What I don't like is Southern's mealy mouthed, cynical attempt to spin the proposed changes as an attempt to improve customer service. They do not care tuppence about safety or service. Just profits.

A pram's not really a slim woman's hand is it?
Surely, you'd only have the road put back if you were at a junction. Standing on plain line is not preventing anything other than the train behind.
The RMT aren't going to win this one and nor will the management. Both are now mired too deep. The result is going to be like the Russian athletes at the Olympics - a fudge job that will satisfy no-one with the truth being distorted by both.

 

[Bromley boy]

A pram's not really a slim woman's hand is it?
Surely, you'd only have the road put back if you were at a junction. Standing on plain line is not preventing anything other than the train behind.
The RMT aren't going to win this one and nor will the management. Both are now mired too deep. The result is going to be like the Russian athletes at the Olympics - a fudge job that will satisfy no-one with the truth being distorted by both.

No, I didn't say it was. But the traveling public do some incredibly reckless things and are often mad/drunk/high/stupid (delete as appropriate). And you have to guard against the risks these kinds of behaviours pose because it's your ass on the line for a manslaughter charge if you misjudge it.

For what it's worth - I'm far from a diehard trade unionist. This time last year I probably had the same view as you. It's only by joining the industry, doing the job and seeing the potential risks involved that I've come to appreciate the arguments against DOO. It also for me puts into perspective the arguments by Charles Horton and his ilk, who I imagine also have very little understanding of life at the sharp end.

You have to contact the signaller irrespective of whether you're at a junction, because they may try to contact you and you will be delaying the service three minutes behind you on plain line, or may have already given you a road at the junction five minutes ahead of you.

 

[jon0844]

Out of interest, could trains have a fisheye camera facing down over every set of doors rather than the cameras at each carriage end, or a down facing radar that can tell if anything is outside the train as it moves out? You could perhaps have similar between carriages?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Bromley boy]

Out of interest, could trains have a fisheye camera facing down over every set of doors rather than the cameras at each carriage end, or a down facing radar that can tell if anything is outside the train as it moves out? You could perhaps have similar between carriages?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

The problem then is that you'd then be dealing with a very large number of screens (24 on a 12 car), therefore presumably also smaller screens showing less detail. We have a mandated maximum of 9 monitors (our monitors are external) and in reality even this is too many to scan effectively between getting interlock and taking power.

The radar point is interesting. I wonder if it has been considered. The problems I can see with it are:

1. Cost. All the layers of approval/sign-off it would have to pass.
2. Accuracy. The detail needed to be captured would be very, very fine indeed to reliably detect an obstructing object (hand, or bag strap). Does a primary radar system exist with sufficiently high PRF, gain control etc. to detect these objects reliably?
3. Would it offer any more than the existing door interlock systems which are a compromise between safety and reliability. In theory sensitive enough to detect large objects (pram, leg), but marginal at detecting smaller objects (bag strap, hand).
4. How would the radar display to the driver over 24 sets of doors in a way that could be meaningfully interpreted in a matter of seconds.

 

[IanXC]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-train-companies-as-they-plot-further-strik/?

This article contains an absolute gem (my bold):

What is the strike about?
The dispute centres around carriage upgrades. When the new rolling stock is brought in, conductors will no longer control the opening and closing of doors as the new trains have an automated system. The Rail and Maritime Union (RMT) claims that the change devalues the role of conductors and puts them at greater risk of redundancy. However Southern says it will free up staff to help passengers, particularly disabled travellers.