Should Southern On Board Supervisors (OBS) be abolished?

[Facing Back]

Only because ASLEF are powerful. That's what's protecting the grade.

Why is ASLEF a factor?

 

[Horizon22]

The thing about OBSs is disabled assistance. Any routes that had conductors had to have OBSs. Even the routes Thameslink took over, such as Horsham, East Grinstead and Littlehampton were supposed to have them, but that quietly went out the window

You could theoretically replace that element with "first to last train" station staffing, which would likely be cheaper than OBS on a 1:1 ratio, but you might need more.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Jan 2024 ==

Why is ASLEF a factor?

Presumably they want the second member of staff on board and would threaten to take industrial action if removed.

 

[Facing Back]

Presumably they want the second member of staff on board and would threaten to take industrial action if removed.

OK thanks

But on Southern - the only place that there are OBS's, DOO is already in the driver's contracts I think. ASLEF were not very vocal during the dispute years back (as I recall)

 

[kacper]

It’s odd, as London Overground are DOO as far as Shepherds Bush.

There are still guarded LO trains? I thought the network was fully DOO for a few years now

 

[Horizon22]

There are still guarded LO trains? I thought the network was fully DOO for a few years now

It is - they were making reference to the part of the route shared with Southern and why it requires guards (it doesn't but the WCML section does I believe).

 

[Surreytraveller]

OK thanks

But on Southern - the only place that there are OBS's, DOO is already in the driver's contracts I think. ASLEF were not very vocal during the dispute years back (as I recall)

DOO is in the contracts, but there are union agreements which state which routes have to have an OBS, and what circumstances a train can run without one

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Jan 2024 ==

Why is ASLEF a factor?

Because ASLEF state that drivers will only work a train on certain routes if there's an OBS

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Jan 2024 ==

There are still guarded LO trains? I thought the network was fully DOO for a few years now

LO turn left at Mitre Bridge Junction. Southern go straight on. I suppose I could have worded it better

 

[Facing Back]

DOO is in the contracts, but there are union agreements which state which routes have to have an OBS, and what circumstances a train can run without one

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Jan 2024 ==


Because ASLEF state that drivers will only work a train on certain routes if there's an OBS

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Jan 2024 ==


LO turn left at Mitre Bridge Junction. Southern go straight on. I suppose I could have worded it better

OK thanks. Presumably these agreements were struck at the time that OBS was being introduced?

 

[Surreytraveller]

OK thanks. Presumably these agreements were struck at the time that OBS was being introduced?

Agreements are modified at regular intervals

 

[Facing Back]

Agreements are modified at regular intervals

ok thanks

 

[Krokodil]

To a non railway worker like myself it seems a bit cockeyed that Thameslink appear to run quite happily without guards or OBSs over arguably more challenging terrain including "the core" than the sections of Southern which cannot function without an OBS. Are there genuine justifications for OBSs other than industrial relations considerations and if so why are Thameslink able to function without OBSs?

The Thameslink core has staffed stations at close intervals so it's not more challenging in terms of things like emergency evacuations and passenger assistance. This is why the last routes to go DOO will be very rural ones, even though they're the least economic to operate.

 

[GordonT]

The Thameslink core has staffed stations at close intervals so it's not more challenging in terms of things like emergency evacuations and passenger assistance. This is why the last routes to go DOO will be very rural ones, even though they're the least economic to operate.

That's a reasonable point although there have been odd occasions where challenging situations have arisen with passengers stranded for protracted periods. The worst example I think related to a train halted between St Pancras and West Hampstead.

 

[Chester1]

They recruited loads of customer service people, on top of the ex-guards and ex-revenue staff. Over time perhaps assessments & management has waned and staff know they can get away with behaviours maybe they couldn’t 5 years ago. Like many things in the railway, their performance has probably declined due to morale issues, pay etc.

I’d turn that around and ask whether the Southern should have remained fully guarded. In my view, if you’re going to have a second person on board, it’s best that they’re a fully trained guard, actively involved in the running of the train. The OBS role is a step removed from this, and vulnerable to removal, so perhaps no surprise they aren’t particularly motivated/engaged (and the general industry malaise that @Horizon22 correctly alludes to above will also be a factor).

Clearly some OBS will be better than others, but having nobody aboard at all a la Southeastern metro and Thameslink guarantees no “customer experience” benefits, removes a deterrent to fare dodging and anti social behaviour, and makes things that much harder for wheelchair users. It also won’t make fares any cheaper, so it’s an odd thing for passengers to be calling for (albeit I seem to recall from the GTR dispute that most passengers do want to see a staff presence).

OBS have much more job security than the average person. Its extremely unlikely that the role will go prior to a 2028-29 general election. Being actively involved in running of the train shouldn't be relevant to motivation if the right people are recruited. Its a customer service role and if people are not sufficiently motivated by interacting with the public they shouldn't be doing a job which revolves around it.

Are these former guards/conductors whose role has been downgraded to OBS? If so, probably no surprise that they have no motivation to do the job

The role was downgraded in 2016. If people are demotivated doing a job that was downgraded seven and a half years ago they need to consider whether they have made the best life decisions! Its more than enough time to expect staff to adapt or move on. Horizon might be able to clarify but it sounds like most staff were recruited as OBS.

 

[Surreytraveller]

The role was downgraded in 2016. If people are demotivated doing a job that was downgraded seven and a half years ago they need to consider whether they have made the best life decisions! Its more than enough time to expect staff to adapt or move on. Horizon might be able to clarify but it sounds like most staff were recruited as OBS.

OBSs started as ex Revenue staff. Then Conductors. I don't think its reasonable to expect staff to adapt over seven years - the railway is the sort of industry where staff work all their lives. Yes, there might be a revolving door for managers, but the staff on the coal face stick around for years. And because the role was never thought through properly in the beginning, Southern is still suffering the after effects of the introduction of the role. Because of the revolving door of managers - those who brought the role in are long gone
And if all the staff who are fed up leave, you'll have a load of new staff who don't know what they're doing and don't know where the train's going, as there is no training for those sorts of things (one of the reasons for the introduction of the grade - to reduce the time and cost of training). So they'll be useless, thereby supporting the argument for getting rid of them

 

[Carlisle]

North of Dorking went DOO in 1999, with north of Epsom long before that

Sutton-Epsom only went DOO about 2 years before that, previously guards joined & left at Sutton for many years.

 

[Towers]

Removal of on board grades of any sort (catering excepted) is highly unlikely these days, now that the railway has begun to fully acknowledge and appreciate its obligations towards rail users with disabilities and requiring assistance. Whilst existing DOO routes continue to get away with it under grandfather rights, destaffing previously staffed trains is not a popular concept any more. Yes you could staff every single station, but that would mean providing appropriate accommodation & facilities, and having a staff member in place from first train to last with very little to do in many cases; that simply isn’t practical.

It would be quite a surprise to see OBS removed from trains.

 

[43066]

OBS have much more job security than the average person. Its extremely unlikely that the role will go prior to a 2028-29 general election.

But rather less security than that of the average guard, and it doesn’t take a genius to see that the role could be dispensed with as a way to make cuts the DfT is looking for.

Being actively involved in running of the train shouldn't be relevant to motivation if the right people are recruited. Its a customer service role and if people are not sufficiently motivated by interacting with the public they shouldn't be doing a job which revolves around it.

But in the real world it will be highly relevant. Everyone knows the OBS role is a bit of a non job. Hence why in my view the better solution would have been to simply keep them as guards.

Removal of on board grades of any sort (catering excepted) is highly unlikely these days, now that the railway has begun to fully acknowledge and appreciate its obligations towards rail users with disabilities and requiring assistance. Whilst existing DOO routes continue to get away with it under grandfather rights, destaffing previously staffed trains is not a popular concept any more. Yes you could staff every single station, but that would mean providing appropriate accommodation & facilities, and having a staff member in place from first train to last with very little to do in many cases; that simply isn’t practical.

It would be quite a surprise to see OBS removed from trains.

I think most of us expected to the role to be removed entirely soon after the guards were downgraded. It was difficult to see why else the TOC (under instruction from the DfT) had fought so hard to remove the guards’ safety critical status. The disability issue is perhaps what saved it - not that that would ever be admitted to of course.

 

[Horizon22]

The role was downgraded in 2016. If people are demotivated doing a job that was downgraded seven and a half years ago they need to consider whether they have made the best life decisions! Its more than enough time to expect staff to adapt or move on. Horizon might be able to clarify but it sounds like most staff were recruited as OBS.

It’s probably changed now but it was about a 60/40 split, but over time I imagine more ex-guards and ex-revenue have left so it’s probably flipped the other way.

As mentioned, these people have been in “new” roles for over 7 years now.

 

[Surreytraveller]

But in the real world it will be highly relevant. Everyone knows the OBS role is a bit of a non job. Hence why in my view the better solution would have been to simply keep them as guards

And the 18 months of upheaval, industrial unrest and damage the changeover from conductors to OBS did, they may as well have kept them as they were. I cannot see what actual benefit altering the grade did

 

[stadler]

It’s probably changed now but it was about a 60/40 split, but over time I imagine more ex-guards and ex-revenue have left so it’s probably flipped the other way.

As mentioned, these people have been in “new” roles for over 7 years now.

The last i heard from someone i know who works at Southern the OBS role is roughly 60% new recruits and 20% ex Guards and 20% ex RPIs currently. Originally all RPIs were converted to OBSs (meaning Southern no longer had RPIs) and all Guards were converted to OBSs (except for a small amount of Guards at some depots to work the trains that still need them) but over the years a large amount of the ex RPIs and ex Guards have left. Recently at Barnham depot four Guards left and at Brighton depot twelve Guards left the company within around one month of the 313s retiring and the role being converted to OBSs. There has been a huge recruitment of new OBSs joining the company over the past couple years so these days most OBSs are new recruits. I reckon in another five or ten years (if the role still exists) it will probably be at least 80% or 90% new recruits as the ex Guards and ex RPIs are constantly leaving.

 

[bramling]

While there are some very good ones, it’s a shame, as any OBS who doesn’t spend time patrolling their train just gives the impression of a turkey voting for Christmas, who’s uppance will surely come someday when the DfT come looking for further industry efficiencies.

One could turn that one round on its head, and say that if DFT decide they are going to pursue efficiencies then it will happen regardless of how keen the staff are. Therefore being keen is simply acting as a mug, and one might as well be as lackadaisical as can be got away with, which in this industry can be quite a lot!

It is never going to work particularly well having a role which has a constant cloud hanging over it. In that sense I’d prefer they had either kept guards as they were, or gone for full DOO. They could have done the latter on a phased basis so that numbers gradually reduced naturally over time.

 

[Towers]

I think most of us expected to the role to be removed entirely soon after the guards were downgraded. It was difficult to see why else the TOC (under instruction from the DfT) had fought so hard to remove the guards’ safety critical status. The disability issue is perhaps what saved it - not that that would ever be admitted to of course.

Oh absolutely, completely agree!

 

[winks]

What is the difference in pay for OBS and retained Guards on Southern, anyone know ?

 

[Bikeman78]

Never even seen an OBS from London to Dorking.

Does that route have an OBS? It's been DOO on power door trains for as long as I can remember. Horsham to Dorking did have a guard and presumably still has an OBS.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jan 2024 ==

The OBSs have only worked Dorking to Horsham, which is the section which used to have conductors. North of Dorking went DOO in 1999, with north of Epsom long before that (obviously slam door trains still had conductors on them after 1999). After OBSs were invented in 2016, 455s that ran between Dorking and Horsham couldn't stop at intermediate stations

455s ran to Horsham until May 2018. There were three return trips on weekdays. Unless I've lost the plot, only the morning southbound trip ran non stop because it had a tight turn round at Horsham.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Does that route have an OBS? It's been DOO on power door trains for as long as I can remember. Horsham to Dorking did have a guard and presumably still has an OBS.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jan 2024 ==


455s ran to Horsham until May 2018. There were three return trips on weekdays. Unless I've lost the plot, only the morning southbound trip ran non stop because it had a tight turn round at Horsham.

I think you're right. May 2018 with all the Thameslink changes rings a bell. Until then the 455s would of gone to Shepherds Bush and Guildford too.
There have never been OBSs north of Dorking (save for passing to and from a depot), indeed Horsham is a crew depot so it would be daft to have them on to/from London

 

[Chester1]

But rather less security than that of the average guard, and it doesn’t take a genius to see that the role could be dispensed with as a way to make cuts the DfT is looking for.



But in the real world it will be highly relevant. Everyone knows the OBS role is a bit of a non job. Hence why in my view the better solution would have been to simply keep them as guards.



I think most of us expected to the role to be removed entirely soon after the guards were downgraded. It was difficult to see why else the TOC (under instruction from the DfT) had fought so hard to remove the guards’ safety critical status. The disability issue is perhaps what saved it - not that that would ever be admitted to of course.

If OBS is considered a "bit of a non job" then it doesn't reflect well on how railway staff value customer service. It is a job that is focused on the thing that the public actually want from the second person. If OBS don't want to a job that revolves around interacting with the public they should start looking for a new job.

One could turn that one round on its head, and say that if DFT decide they are going to pursue efficiencies then it will happen regardless of how keen the staff are. Therefore being keen is simply acting as a mug, and one might as well be as lackadaisical as can be got away with, which in this industry can be quite a lot!

It is never going to work particularly well having a role which has a constant cloud hanging over it. In that sense I’d prefer they had either kept guards as they were, or gone for full DOO. They could have done the latter on a phased basis so that numbers gradually reduced naturally over time.

The role is safe until the next election and therefore extremely safe until the end of the decade. I would be gobsmacked if the DfT tried to get rid of OBS under a Labour government. After seven and a half years, likely to become at least thirteen, the role is very likely to last longer than the remaining careers of many rail staff who disliked its creation.

It’s probably changed now but it was about a 60/40 split, but over time I imagine more ex-guards and ex-revenue have left so it’s probably flipped the other way.

As mentioned, these people have been in “new” roles for over 7 years now.

I have found that there is a problem in the public sector of people staying in jobs they don't like due to being unable to get same pay elsewhere, the job security and just being too lazy to properly job hunt. It annoyed me working alongside people doing a half arsed job but I realised they were the biggest losers. Life is too short to spend years doing a job you don't enjoy or respect. I am guessing there will be some people like this in rail industry too.

 

[Surreytraveller]

If OBS is considered a "bit of a non job" then it doesn't reflect well on how railway staff value customer service. It is a job that is focused on the thing that the public actually want from the second person. If OBS don't want to a job that revolves around interacting with the public they should start looking for a new job.

Its not how railway staff value customer service. Its how railway staff feel their bosses view customer service

 

[Chester1]

Its not how railway staff value customer service. Its how railway staff feel their bosses view customer service

Some of the posts by members in the industry, especially when the role was introduced have been dismissive of it. I do think generally we have a problem in this country with a snobbish attitude towards customer service jobs. I am an introvert and I value customer service staff because they do jobs I would find especially difficult. I would like to see OBS introduced on non metro DOO services e.g. Great Northern but that will be impossible to justify if Southern OBS avoid passengers!

 

[JonathanH]

And the 18 months of upheaval, industrial unrest and damage the changeover from conductors to OBS did, they may as well have kept them as they were. I cannot see what actual benefit altering the grade did

Altering the grade made it easier to remove them after the period for which it was promised they would not be removed.

With the switch from Southern to Thameslink for some services, it remains tenuous as to why Thameslink runs DOO with self dispatch and Southern doesn't on the same routes, which was the basis for the original change.

I would be gobsmacked if the DfT tried to get rid of OBS under a Labour government.

Various routes went to single staff / DOO working under the last Labour government - in particular c2c services from Fenchurch Street when the 357s were introduced.

 

[43066]

One could turn that one round on its head, and say that if DFT decide they are going to pursue efficiencies then it will happen regardless of how keen the staff are. Therefore being keen is simply acting as a mug, and one might as well be as lackadaisical as can be got away with, which in this industry can be quite a lot!

It is never going to work particularly well having a role which has a constant cloud hanging over it. In that sense I’d prefer they had either kept guards as they were, or gone for full DOO. They could have done the latter on a phased basis so that numbers gradually reduced naturally over time.

Agreed. Much as I don’t agree with destaffing going for full DOO would have at least made sense. What we’ve ended up with is a deeply unsatisfactory half way house. It would be better all round if the DfT simply hadn’t meddled with the existing arrangements in the first place.

If OBS is considered a "bit of a non job" then it doesn't reflect well on how railway staff value customer service. It is a job that is focused on the thing that the public actually want from the second person.

Everyone operational considers it a non job, because that’s exactly what it is. If motivation levels are low, because the livelihoods of railway staff are currently being used a political football by the government, what exactly do you expect?

If OBS don't want to a job that revolves around interacting with the public they should start looking for a new job.

Perhaps they simply view their job as a means to an end, a way to pay their bills, and have identified that they can get away with doing the bare minimum while facing no sanction due to the lone working nature of the role, so they think “why bother”!?

 

[Horizon22]

Everyone operational considers it a non job, because that’s exactly what it is. If motivation levels are low, because the livelihoods of railway staff are currently being used a political football by the government, what exactly do you expect?

It definitely doesn't have to be though; active ticket checks (and occasional selling), good passenger announcements, dealing with disruption issues, providing passenger info, patrolling the train, providing assisted travel on-board etc.

There's no such thing as a non-job really, and it's rather snobbish to think that just because it's not operationally required it's a "non-job". Lots of customer service people are employed on the railway (not to mention people away from 'frontline' roles) who are obviously providing some benefit.