Surely the fundamental issue here is all about the number of safety trained people on a train and not who opens/closes the doors. If you pick a fight about who operates the doors then you will almost certainly lose as that precedent was set in the 1980's with Bedpan and Strathclyde Manning Agreement. If the argument is about safety on an increasingly busy railway, with more anti social behaviour and possible acts of terror than ever before your case becomes much stronger.
I don't care who operates the doors on my train but I do care about my safety, security and that of my fellow passengers. There is no clear argument for any extension to DOO/DCO/OPO or whatever else you call it other than financial. Until a clear evidence based case is made then the status quo should remain.
I don't care who operates the doors on my train but I do care about my safety, security and that of my fellow passengers. There is no clear argument for any extension to DOO/DCO/OPO or whatever else you call it other than financial. Until a clear evidence based case is made then the status quo should remain.