Train drivers will finally have access to toilets

[bleeder4]

This has been quite an eye-opening discussion. From my point of view as a passenger, not a rail worker, I would have expected that if drivers needed the loo they would head down the train at a station stop and use the one on the train, or the one on the station. I would imagine most passengers think the same.

 

[Harpo]

I would have expected that if drivers needed the loo they would head down the train at a station stop and use the one on the train, or the one on the station.

All assuming that there is one on the train to start with. Even if there is, there’s no guarantee that it will be working and vacant. Ditto for a station loo assuming its on the platform and unlocked.

That’s all added stress for a safety critical worker who might well be trying to visit the loo during a 60 second dwell without causing delay.

 

[357]

I fully agree! But it’s peak 21st Century thinking to just imagine these things won’t happen without cost.

Who is saying this won't cost?

There are costs to employing people. I've employed people in the past and can run through the expenses for you, if you like?

I can only imagine if you have a job that you refuse your pension and pay for your uniform, and if you're ever sick refuse any sick pay "because it will have a cost"?

 

[Mawkie]

That’s all added stress for a safety critical worker who might well be trying to visit the loo during a 60 second dwell without causing delay.

We don't have delay attribution on LU, so what are the real world consequences of a driver going to the toilet on a station and causing say, a 5 minutes delay?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

As I say, if basic physical needs are not being met, that is an issue that needs addressing urgently, irrespective of cost. This is surely basic stuff in 21st century Britain - we aren’t living in Victorian times.

Absolutely! A big +1 from me.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Wow the number of people on this discussion who are keen to misquote me and put words in my mouth that I haven’t said is eye-opening. For those who are hard-of-thought, I was pointing out that this (long overdue) 4hr maximum rule will ADD to existing costs, and it is infantile not to consider / question how this will be paid for and what impact it will have on the railway’s overall finances and viability. Much as people like wishfully imagine that there is a magic money tree, there really isn’t.

I am not saying these rules aren’t the right thing to do, I’m not saying drivers should go back to the Stone Age and take a dump under a bush by a goods loop or anything like that. I’m saying HOW WILL THE EXTRA COST BE ABSORBED / PASSED ON.

 

[357]

We don't have delay attribution on LU, so what are the real world consequences of a driver going to the toilet on a station and causing say, a 5 minutes delay?

I used to have a diagram that if there were no working toilets on the train, had 6 hours without easy access to facilities.

At Southend Central, about half way through, I'd change ends, set up the cab, then call the signaller and control to let them know I need to go to the other side of the station to use the station facilities.

It would delay my train by about ten minutes but as I was in a bay platform I wasn't blocking anything.

Certain controllers would get me to run fast and skip certain stations to be on time in London, other controllers would insist I ran as booked and was delayed for the rest of the shift. All I resulted in was more delay minutes and me booking 10-15 minutes overtime.

I did always make sure that I'd email my manager if the delay went down to "Driver emergency PNB" and not "Train fault", as I felt the delay wasn't due to any fault of my own but down to Bombardiers inability to provide a fully functional train.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Aug 2025 ==

HOW WILL THE EXTRA COST BE ABSORBED / PASSED ON.

Oh my, if I was allowed to share some of the financial waste I've seen over the years in this industry, I think you'd faint.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Aug 2025 ==

HOW WILL THE EXTRA COST BE ABSORBED / PASSED ON

Could you please post this in some other threads, such as TPE Mk5s, SWR new units, Crossrail, HS2, etc?

Why is it drivers being able to use the toilet that causes you so much anger you feel the need to shout?

Anyone here old enough to remember the platform issues when they built Shepherds Bush?

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Oh my, if I was allowed to share some of the financial waste I've seen over the years in this industry, I think you'd faint.

And me too, I imagine we both regularly experience this. Nobody is suggesting this particular change is a waste of money incidentally, but nobody has answered my question either.

 

[muz379]

Wow the number of people on this discussion who are keen to misquote me and put words in my mouth that I haven’t said is eye-opening. For those who are hard-of-thought, I was pointing out that this (long overdue) 4hr maximum rule will ADD to existing costs, and it is infantile not to consider / question how this will be paid for and what impact it will have on the railway’s overall finances and viability. Much as people like wishfully imagine that there is a magic money tree, there really isn’t.

I am not saying these rules aren’t the right thing to do, I’m not saying drivers should go back to the Stone Age and take a dump under a bush by a goods loop or anything like that. I’m saying HOW WILL THE EXTRA COST BE ABSORBED / PASSED ON.

Without knowing precisely what the costs are going to be its somewhat difficult to try and consider how they will be met .

I mean at some operators or parts of the industry there wont be extra costs because the requirements are already being met .

Actually physically providing the toilets will just become part of the specification for future refurbishments of stations and procurement of rolling stock which will already be budgeted for ,no doubt we will see collaboration between operators and NWR to map the locations of existing facilities in the interim and any station refurb work going forward will probably have staff toilets as part of their specification .

As for diagrams , just because you introduce a new rule into diagramming doesn't mean you suddenly need hundreds of new drivers , there are other changes that could be made to mitigagte this such as swapping work around between different depots , changing service patterns . I think it is a bit alarmist to automatically assume that this is going to result in the requirement for new drivers that nobody is going to want or be able to pay for so we will see timetables cut as a result .

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Without knowing precisely what the costs are going to be its somewhat difficult to try and consider how they will be met .

I mean at some operators or parts of the industry there wont be extra costs because the requirements are already being met .

Actually physically providing the toilets will just become part of the specification for future refurbishments of stations and procurement of rolling stock which will already be budgeted for ,no doubt we will see collaboration between operators and NWR to map the locations of existing facilities in the interim and any station refurb work going forward will probably have staff toilets as part of their specification .

As for diagrams , just because you introduce a new rule into diagramming doesn't mean you suddenly need hundreds of new drivers , there are other changes that could be made to mitigagte this such as swapping work around between different depots , changing service patterns . I think it is a bit alarmist to automatically assume that this is going to result in the requirement for new drivers that nobody is going to want or be able to pay for so we will see timetables cut as a result .

Excellent post, thank you. If this rule is to come in from December this year (which I guess it is?) there will be a real challenge in providing temporary facilities etc and rewriting diagrams which are already well under way being completed. The December timetable was set in stone and published to downstream systems a few weeks ago so it’s in the public domain.

Maybe there is an element of alarm here but (to quote another poster) I’ve seen enough waste - shedloads of it in fact - from goalposts moving late in the day, to write a book.

 

[WAB]

One of these installed at remote stations, maybe? Angry local resident included free of charge I wonder how many drivers would use one of these over an onboard toilet...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Aug 2025 ==

Maybe there is an element of alarm here but (to quote another poster) I’ve seen enough waste - shedloads of it in fact - from goalposts moving late in the day, to write a book.

Absolutely. The train planning timescales are as they are for a reason. Making widespread changes at the last minute is very risky for service delivery.

 

[muz379]

Excellent post, thank you. If this rule is to come in from December this year (which I guess it is?) there will be a real challenge in providing temporary facilities etc and rewriting diagrams which are already well under way being completed. The December timetable was set in stone and published to downstream systems a few weeks ago so it’s in the public domain.

Maybe there is an element of alarm here but (to quote another poster) I’ve seen enough waste - shedloads of it in fact - from goalposts moving late in the day, to write a book.

The actual implementation of it , and what is required to be done at individual employers will be down to local consultation/negotiation between Reps and management at the individual tocs/focs . Through the processes already in place for reviewing diagrams and the existing provision of welfare/PNB faciltiies . That will obviously take some time to establish what needs to be done to meet with the new requirements . Personally I don't think the requirements will be met fully with this December timetable change at places that don't already meet them . What we will probably see over the next 12 months is temporary facilities popping up accross the network , with diagram changes put off until May next year unless theres small changes that can take place between then and now .

The Aslef press release says that companies will adopt a charter by 19th November 2025 and will implement it within 12 months .Seems a sensible way to proceed given that you can't just change diagrams or provide loads of temporary toilets overnight

 

[CharlieSpotted]

Thinking aloud, there are probably many many, portaloos and other temporary toilet facilities sitting unused in suppliers yards once the summer festival / events season is over and the weather turns.

 

[whoosh]

If DfT say ‘no’ to the additional cost this incurs (most likely in the current climate) it will mean services being removed from the timetable.

Drop in the ocean. Well... in the toilet.

Have you seen how much a train costs to lease?

It'll be the private freight companies that'll have to change the most.

In the last few years London Overground have gone from 30 minute PNBs to 35 minute ones, and Merseyrail have gone from 30 minute PNBs to 40 minute ones (which can be reduced to 30 minutes once per week during disruption), and the sky didn't fall in!

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

It'll be the private freight companies that'll have to change the most.

To my understanding FOCs tend to run on wafer-thin profit margins so may be the ones who struggle to contain a cost overhead increase, and of course don’t have DfT backing financially.

 

[357]

If this rule is to come in from December this year (which I guess it is?)

Nobody has said it's from December? Where are you getting this info from?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Aug 2025 ==

If this rule is to come in from December this year (which I guess it is?)

Nobody has said it's from December? Where are you getting this info from?

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Nobody has said it's from December? Where are you getting this info from?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Aug 2025 ==


Nobody has said it's from December? Where are you getting this info from?

The charter is to be adopted from November I think? But if there is a grace period of say 12-18 months to adopt / adapt to it then at least there is some breathing space.

 

[357]

To my understanding FOCs tend to run on wafer-thin profit margins so may be the ones who struggle to contain a cost overhead increase, and of course don’t have DfT backing financially.

If a business can't afford to employ people then they shouldn't be employing people.

I'm not going to wet myself so that the MD can still afford get his Jaguar waxed.

 

[WAB]

In the last few years London Overground have gone from 30 minute PNBs to 35 minute ones, and Merseyrail have gone from 30 minute PNBs to 40 minute ones (which can be reduced to 30 minutes once per week during disruption), and the sky didn't fall in!

Diagramming for high-frequency metro operations is not the same kettle of fish as more complex regional operations. I wouldn't expect the same outcome for EMR, for example.

 

[357]

Diagramming for high-frequency metro operations is not the same kettle of fish as more complex regional operations. I wouldn't expect the same outcome for EMR, for example.

An easy win for those operations is to identify places where the train has pathing time etc, and install new facilities where walking time will be minimal.

I suspect this may lead to increases journey times on some journeys as it'll be the only way to diagram it.

 

[43066]

Thinking aloud, there are probably many many, portaloos and other temporary toilet facilities sitting unused in suppliers yards once the summer festival / events season is over and the weather turns.

I’m not sure which professionals earning £80 - 100k per year are expected to use post festival portaloos at work, but I can assure you train drivers aren’t amongst them.

 

[Cowley]

I think it’s probably time to lock the door on this somewhat bad tempered thread.

I’m off to read the paper in toilet.

Cheers.