Should trains have CCTV fitted to monitor what’s happening in the cab?

[styles]

Whilst there are nuances in every job, I'd be seething if there was CCTV over my shoulder at work, and I simply work in an office.

mods note - split from this thread:

Near miss with an access ramp at Norwood Junction station (RAIB)

As per: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/near-miss-with-an-access-ramp-at-norwood-junction-station? Investigation into a near miss involving a manual access ramp at Norwood Junction station on the Windrush line, 1 July 2025. At around 09:52 on 1 July 2025, a train operated by Arriva Rail...

www.railforums.co.uk

I agree that the above examples are absurd.

But I work in an office, in healthcare, and CCTV covering me is completely normal and I wouldn't argue against it. It's a workplace, not a home, and it should be monitored as such.

 

[ainsworth74]

I remember during COVID working on a fleet that could be remote downloaded and certain managers spent their entire day working from home writing up drivers for little things. I was personally picked up for 0.44mph over the speed limit for 21 seconds, and holding the couple button for 4.8 seconds instead of 5 seconds.

Honestly I don't know how you're still driving with such shocking lapses in judgement...

But yeah whilst generally speaking I think in-cab CCTV isn't a terrible idea (I'm currently writing this message at work with CCTV recording me) it does still require a bit a of trust (I know my manager isn't going to be watching back to shout at me for taking a couple of minutes break, it's there in case of an incident with a member of the public) and, as always, the railway manages to impress with the lack of trust that seems to flow both ways.

Strikes me that in-cab CCTV should be treated the same way as the other data that's recorded and, in theory, should only be being accessed as part of reviewing a specific incident or during normal random data downloads. I don't think there's any reason for managers to be accessing the CCTV outside of that (nor any of the other data!). Just as I don't expect my manager to be accessing our CCTV except if there's an incident.

 

[Posa]

In cab cctv would have made zero difference to this scenario.

They didn't care and habitually used their phone during their duty.

Unless people are advocating a room full of driver managers watching every active cabs live feed to instantly stop a driver.

 

[styles]

In cab cctv would have made zero difference to this scenario.

They didn't care and habitually used their phone during their duty.

Unless people are advocating a room full of driver managers watching every active cabs live feed to instantly stop a driver.

I disagree.

I suspect some drivers use their phones while driving because they know they'll get away with it.

If you know there's a CCTV camera watching you, you'd be far less likely to break the safety rules by pulling your phone out.

 

[leonie13]

Why are drivers against in-cab CCTV? Surely if you're doing nothing wrong then you've got nothing to be afraid of/nothing to hide?

Especially if the CCTV is only stored locally and only retrieved in the event of an incident.

My union rep once said to me "we'd never ever let it happen - there'd be a complete breakdown in IR and there'd be strike after strike".

 

[Dave W]

I agree that the above examples are absurd.

But I work in an office, in healthcare, and CCTV covering me is completely normal and I wouldn't argue against it. It's a workplace, not a home, and it should be monitored as such.

I think there's a difference between general CCTV coverage, and the specificity of CCTV trained on an individual doing their duties. Why am I not trusted?

 

[styles]

I think there's a difference between general CCTV coverage, and the specificity of CCTV trained on an individual doing their duties. Why am I not trusted?

You are trusted.

But when somebody dies, having a full picture of the events leading up to it is critical to learn lessons.

Aeroplanes have black boxes and CCTV. It's an entirely normal practice.

If you;re really paranoid about managers stalking drivers then you could advocate for CCTV but without live feeds.

 

[357]

I agree that the above examples are absurd.

But I work in an office, in healthcare, and CCTV covering me is completely normal and I wouldn't argue against it. It's a workplace, not a home, and it should be monitored as such.

Do you have somewhere you can go to use the toilet without being watched? Pick your nose?

If you;re really paranoid about managers stalking drivers then you could advocate for CCTV but without live feeds

They can still look at CCTV after it's been recorded though.

There have been a number of cases throughout my career where managers have been found to "stalk" certain drivers or staff via OTMR, station CCTV etc.

 

[ainsworth74]

There have been a number of cases throughout my career where managers have been found to "stalk" certain drivers or staff via OTMR, station CCTV etc.

I really do despair at the railway industry sometimes.

 

[Dave W]

You are trusted.

But when somebody dies, having a full picture of the events leading up to it is critical to learn lessons.

Aeroplanes have black boxes and CCTV. It's an entirely normal practice.

If you;re really paranoid about managers stalking drivers then you could advocate for CCTV but without live feeds.

I respect your point of view, but I don't think we'll reach a shared standpoint on this. Which is fine - be boring if we all thought the same

If my boss wanted sight of everything that I did in this way, I'd be livid. As soon as trust is out of the equation the industrial relations issue is vast and we know the railway industry is already pretty fraught in that respect.

On the aeroplane point, my assumption is that by their nature, CCTV systems on planes couldn't be live like that. A middle ground, perhaps, but it still asks questions of workplace trust.

 

[AlterEgo]

You are trusted.

But when somebody dies, having a full picture of the events leading up to it is critical to learn lessons.

Aeroplanes have black boxes and CCTV. It's an entirely normal practice.

If you;re really paranoid about managers stalking drivers then you could advocate for CCTV but without live feeds.

Aeroplanes do not have CCTV on the flight deck recording the pilots.

 

[styles]

Do you have somewhere you can go to use the toilet without being watched? Pick your nose?

Well yes, as do rail drivers.

hey can still look at CCTV after it's been recorded though.

There have been a number of cases throughout my career where managers have been found to "stalk" certain drivers or staff via OTMR, station CCTV etc.

And those people should be sacked. Much as people have been sakced from the police for browsing Sarah Eveard's case files or people have been sacked from healthcare for snooping on Pricess Kate's records.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Jun 2026 ==

Aeroplanes do not have CCTV on the flight deck recording the pilots.

The easyJet pilot I spoke to on 21.06.2026 seemed to say otherwise.

 

[AlterEgo]

The easyJet pilot I spoke to on 21.06.2026 seemed to say otherwise.

Whichever, it is surely not true? There is CCTV on some airlines to monitor who is at the flight deck door on the "public" side.
 
They have also had documentaries filmed on the flight deck too, and sometimes pilots use a GoPro to record their landings etc, but there is no CCTV.

There is no (or very little) cockpit CCTV anywhere in the world, AIUI, for many of the same reasons there isn't CCTV in train cabs here.

 

[Recessio]

There’s a reason why access to the cab is more tightly controlled than that; worth noting that a “guest” in the cab was cited as the primary distracting factor in a recent overspeed incident at LNER.

It is alarming how often this keeps coming up in RAIB reports - especially as a guest in the cab has also been suspected as a contributing factor in fatal incidents (e.g. the 1994 Cowden crash, alongside other contributing factors). A distraction is a distraction - whether a 2nd person in the cab, or a mobile phone - and if it keeps coming up in RAIB reports, I think the industry needs to consider why the processes to prevent these distractions aren't being followed and/or whether those processes are inadequate and more strenuous measures may be needed.

I do remember reading on these forums once (on a previous thread about a mobile phone in the cab) about a driver "Radio Maggie" who used their phone to ring into a radio show, live on air, whilst driving a train! Beggars belief...

 

[357]

Well yes, as do rail drivers.

Congratulations on completely missing the point and issue at hand.

If you care to do a little research you'll find that in many situations they do not.

And I don't just mean delaying services. Many drivers are rostered breaks in locations with no toilets and no facilities apart from the train they are on.

That is without getting into the issue of drivers who delay trains to use the toilet too often being seen as troublemakers or militant.

Until the matter above is resolved properly - CCTV in cabs is a non starter

 

[styles]

Congratulations on completely missing the point and issue at hand.

Congratulations on making an off-the-cuff insult as your opening argument.

If you care to do a little research you'll find that in many situations they do not.

I did research, and based my post upon it. Try another sly dig.

And I don't just mean delaying services. Many drivers are rostered breaks in locations with no toilets and no facilities apart from the train they are on.

Can you specify a single location where this toilet is covered by CCTV, which is implied by this wild comment?

Do you have somewhere you can go to use the toilet without being watched? Pick your nose?

This quite obviously doesn't happen, ever.

That is without getting into the issue of drivers who delay trains to use the toilet too often being seen as troublemakers or militant.

Until the matter above is resolved properly - CCTV in cabs is a non starter

This doesn't even read in plain English.

 

[Krokodil]

Can you specify a single location where this toilet is covered by CCTV, which is implied by this wild comment?

That's not what they're saying.

They're saying that at some operators (particularly freight but also some passenger) drivers are forced to urinate in bottles. They're saying that this issue should be dealt with before fitting cameras.

 

[PudseyBearHST]

The easiest way of reducing that % of people who think they can get away with it is a regular campaign of buffer stops checks where managers are watching you pull into a terminus, asking to check where your phone is and showing that it is turned off.

No need for expensive blocking solutions or CCTV in cabs.

“I don’t have a phone.” Are you going to search me and my bag then?

 

[bramling]

Congratulations on completely missing the point and issue at hand.

If you care to do a little research you'll find that in many situations they do not.

And I don't just mean delaying services. Many drivers are rostered breaks in locations with no toilets and no facilities apart from the train they are on.

That is without getting into the issue of drivers who delay trains to use the toilet too often being seen as troublemakers or militant.

Until the matter above is resolved properly - CCTV in cabs is a non starter

I can genuinely see two sides to this.

Drivers are well-paid professionals and there should be a level of mutual trust between management, the safety authorities, the passenger and the driver, such that there shouldn’t need to be grounds to be wanting to look at what was going on inside a cab.

Likewise, we have seen only one fatality in over 25 years that has been caused by a driver error, although this increases if one includes the Croydon tram derailment (there’s then a debate to be had as to whether that would have happened had the track layout and safety systems mitigated against a risk that was probably fairly forseeable). This isn’t massive justification for an extensive programme of retrofitting in-cab cameras.

However there is a flip side to this coin, clearly there have been some incidents where things have been going on that shouldn’t have been. Again matter for debate as to whether this is the thin end of a wedge, or whether they have led to incidents precisely because they are isolated cases.

There’s no right or wrong answer to this. I wouldn’t want someone watching me scratch my ball, but equally I don’t want to be on a train where the driver may be on the phone. If we end up with a really serious incident where cab distraction is a factor then the balance of argument is going to tip.

 

[357]

Can you specify a single location where this toilet is covered by CCTV, which is implied by this wild comment?

Driving cabs aren't currently covered by CCTV - but the theme from yourself seems to be that they should be.

Many drivers find themselves using bottles or going out of the cab door due to lack of adequate facilities.

We can't seriously look at in cab CCTV without sorting various other issues such as toilet provision

 

[RJ]

As the owner of a vehicle operation, CCTV has its place.

It can exonerate the driver and the company from any wrongdoing where incidents happen. Particularly in accident claims where third parties make things up to spite the driver, generate a payout or get themselves off the hook when they're at fault.

I've driven buses where there's CCTV in the cab overlooking the driver and sometimes the pedals for years and have never been in the slightest bit bothered. The only reason to have a problem with it is you're doing things during the course of your work which you wouldn't be doing if your manager was watching. If it was genuinely down to general privacy concerns, you'd barely be able to leave your house to get to work as there are cameras everywhere - people's front doors, shop fronts, public transport, ANPR, on street CCTV and so on.

All that said, sometimes I wish I didn't have to look at CCTV.

 

[saltywalrus]

Whichever, it is surely not true? There is CCTV on some airlines to monitor who is at the flight deck door on the "public" side.
 
They have also had documentaries filmed on the flight deck too, and sometimes pilots use a GoPro to record their landings etc, but there is no CCTV.

There is no (or very little) cockpit CCTV anywhere in the world, AIUI, for many of the same reasons there isn't CCTV in train cabs here.

I'm not aware of any plans cockpits with CCTV in them, but almost all of them have voice recording systems - which would be able to identify mobile phone use, although wouldn't be as conclusive as CCTV evidence.

Driving cabs aren't currently covered by CCTV - but the theme from yourself seems to be that they should be.

Many drivers find themselves using bottles or going out of the cab door due to lack of adequate facilities.

We can't seriously look at in cab CCTV without sorting various other issues such as toilet provision

Or we could just do both? No need to contrive a false dichotomy.

 

[styles]

Driving cabs aren't currently covered by CCTV - but the theme from yourself seems to be that they should be.

Many drivers find themselves using bottles or going out of the cab door due to lack of adequate facilities.

We can't seriously look at in cab CCTV without sorting various other issues such as toilet provision

Ok so no toilet cubicles are covered by CCTV, thanks for clarifying.

 

[leonie13]

We can't seriously look at in cab CCTV without sorting various other issues such as toilet provision

Yes we can. And should.

Conflating both issues isn't justified.

 

[RailwayRookie]

Ok so no toilet cubicles are covered by CCTV, thanks for clarifying.

Im sure you know what they mean but I believe what they is saying is that where current facilities may not be available for a driver and they are in a position where they need to relief themselves somewhere other than a toilet. Should that be recorded on Cab CCTV?

 

[styles]

Im sure you know what they mean but I believe what they is saying is that where current facilities may not be available for a driver and they are in a position where they need to relief themselves somewhere other than a toilet. Should that be recorded on Cab CCTV?

I know what they were saying. They made an implication about managers spying on drivers while they poo'd, which isn't the case and won't ever be the case. It's pure scaremongering.

 

[AlterEgo]

I know what they were saying. They made an implication about managers spying on drivers while they poo'd, which isn't the case and won't ever be the case. It's pure scaremongering.

But I wouldn't want to have to go to the toilet that was covered by CCTV anywhere, whether I felt I'd be spied on or not. It seems to be to be a fundamental part of dignity at work?

 

[styles]

But I wouldn't want to have to go to the toilet that was covered by CCTV anywhere, whether I felt I'd be spied on or not. It seems to be to be a fundamental part of dignity at work?

Good job that there aren't any toilets on trains or planes where CCTV covers the cubicles then.

It's almost like it was a made up strawman to argue against CCTV in the cabs?

 

[AlterEgo]

Good job that there aren't any toilets on trains or planes where CCTV covers the cubicles then.

It's almost like it was a made up strawman to argue against CCTV in the cabs?

But there are plenty of trains without any toilets on board at all. This is a genuine issue. It is not uncommon for drivers to relieve themselves in the cab for various reasons, though this really should be a separate thread.

 

[RailwayRookie]

I know what they were saying. They made an implication about managers spying on drivers while they poo'd, which isn't the case and won't ever be the case. It's pure scaremongering.

They made a point about managers spying on employees. Which happens by your own admission.

And they made a point that people have a right to privacy to poo or pick their nose.

The implication could be that if cab CCTV is introduced then drivers could then see people relieving themselves there with no other alternative. And then the argument was that we wouldn't need to be at that point if the other issues were dealt with first.

This is all getting horribly off topic don't you agree? Perhaps we should all put this part to bed and get back to the real focus of the report.