Well it is by increasing the services offered with the new services effectively costing less, whether directly or indirectly by DCO on other services. That is consistent with not being about getting rid of current guards but not letting the working method which is inefficient continue into the future, a pragmatic way forwards.
I still don't really understand the inefficiency argument. The proposal, if the DfT and Northern are to be believed, involves a genuine commitment to maintaining a second member of staff on most trains. If they're there, they have to go to a set of doors at each station to check whether anyone needs assistance (and they'll only be in the way if they stay in the saloon anyway). Whilst they're doing that, they might as well dispatch the train (even if the driver releases the doors). There's no significant efficiency gains to be achieved by doing otherwise.
If I were in charge of a response to this situation I wouldn't expect to take much account of what was expected by enthusiasts and certainly would not be fettered by what the union expects. The overall distance involved is in any case less important than the time between staffed stops in terms of what the public seems to want.
The time between staffed stops is what I was getting at, really. I agree that's more relevant than the overall journey length. In the case of most 'Northern Connect' routes, the time between staffed stops is and will remain rather long.
The ability to waive the conditions for reimbursement are built into the franchise agreement already because they at the discretion of the Secretary of State. If the 50% DCO requirement were to be lowered others could claim that their behaviour in respect of the ITT would have been different if they had known that the Government was not serious about DCO. Furthermore any future requirement of that type associated with subsidy taking franchises would be fatally flawed. I will not hold my breath waiting for the government to concede on DCO.
I think I agree with you. If the current franchise holder throws the keys back, though, things might be different?
this is disgusting enough is enough why are the goverment not getting involved,the staff must earn so much money they can afford not to work,why dont they think about the people who are paying there wages
The Government are involved, very much. They're the ones who insisted on the "DCO" requirement, knowing that industrial action was inevitable. Peter Wilkinson from the DfT said, two or three years ago now, that there was going to be a lot of disruption. The RSSB assessed the likely impact of various implementation options. Your "disgust" is justified, in their eyes.
Are guards trained in emergency first aid? Just wondering what it is anticipated will happen regarding the all too frequent “passenger taken ill” situations. You can’t expect untrained fellow passengers to know what to do.
I suppose someone would have to press the communication button but how many would feel confident to do that?
On a DOO train, you can pull the passcom and speak to the Driver, who can't really do a huge amount other than to stop at the next station, call for assistance and wait there - at the very most, make a quick call to arrange for an ambulance at the next station, and maybe a PA call for anyone on the train who can assist.
The Guard, on the other hand, can continually liaise with the Driver, their own Control and the ambulance service to work out where's best to meet the ambulance crew. That's probably even more relevant on the rural routes that feature in this dispute, where it's often much better to keep going to a more suitable station (arranging to run fast if necessary) than it is to stop at a rural shack like Dent or Edale where it's going to take a long time for an ambulance to arrive and even longer to get to the nearest suitable hospital. The Driver alone, or passengers using mobile phones (if there's any phone signal) just can't make those sorts of arrangements.
I personally believe any customer facing member of staff in any industry should be mandated by law, unless unable due to a disability, to hold a basic first aid certificate along the lines of the one-day-every-3-years Scout First Response qualification.
For staff who could end up without help for a long time - so all traincrew, or at least all guards, OBS and DOO drivers - a more detailed course would be appropriate.
It would save lives, not only on the railway.
Agreed very wholeheartedly.
Why not have a few Sunday strikes (and maybe weekdays) instead to lend some credence that it is mostly about safety concerns rather than a cynical way to have Saturday off. We wont forget these ludicrous strikes in a hurry, for goodness sake jobs have been preserved for many years which is more than many people.
It's not just about jobs. There have been midweek strikes, which have less impact on Northern but probably do more damage to the economy. Saturdays must be more effective.
Remember the RMT are affiliated with the TUSC not Labour because Labour aren't far enough to the left for them - as mentioned already they stuck two fingers up at Steve Rotheram's request (one of the most left wing people in the Labour Party.) Some of the critics of the RMT are trade union members themselves.
