Allowed?

[WestCoast]

Why would the Driver have to leave the cab to make a brew?

I carry a brew kit with me in my bag consisting of a mug, flask, teabags etc so I can make a drink when the train is stopped.

Yeah, the driver can't pop to the kitchen/buffet/shop/trolley on a Pacer! Sensible idea.

 

[whhistle]

That is why I haven't posted a time or service. I have no itention of reporting it and yes I did just wonder if it was allowed.

I saw someone robbing a bank once.
I don't intend on reporting that either! :roll:

 

[455driver]

I think the guard just said something to him. I Would have thought cab to cab radio is best for this.

On some units its quicker to walk the length of the train and tell the driver in person rather than try and use the useless cab to cab.

There are many reasons a guard will need to speak to a driver ranging from a message from control (which will sometimes be relayed through the guard), problem with the train that the driver may be aware of right down to asking them if they are going for a pint at the weekend.

Most guards will NOT enter the cab if the train is slowing for a station (or signal) but will use their common sense (and route knowledge) about when it is best to enter.

All told not a big deal really and the driver can always tell the guard to "foxtrot oscar" if needed.

 

[TDK]

Well I do think you'll stir something up by posting that...

Do you really think a guard/TM popping into the cab for 10-15 seconds at an appropriate time (e.g. not stopping for station or signal) with a cup of tea or coffee is going to impact on safety?

Strictly you can't do it, but the driver needs his coffee!

Who ways you can't do it? Request stops? Stop orders? Safety critical info?

In all honesty it is safer to pop your head in the cab to relay info than it is to call on the cab to cab as this is more of a distraction.

If a manager disciplines a guard for communicating with the driver in this format and it is info for the running of the train a union rep somewhere would block all comms between guard and driver when the train is moving, now, for instance, a train has had the pass coms isolated en route, the guard cannot communivate with the driver. Train out of service and many disgruntles punters.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

I have often seen this, while seated in coach A. Seen a bacon sandwich being delivered on Wrexham & Shropshire at a prolonged station stop (timetabled of course)!

Just out of interest, how would you be able to see this on a 67 & DVT? If the driver is in the loco then the only access to him is via the station platform, a good 20 yard walk from the nearest window a passenger could see out of.
If he is in the DVT then the only access to him is via the guards compartment, through the cycle/wheelchair storage and into the cab, which is through four sets of doors from where passengers are seated.

Back to the OP, the guard will pop into the driving cab from time to time if he/she feels they have information the driver will need. Yes, there are times when the guard will bring in a cup of tea or something from the trolley and yes, they will call on the Cab to Cab to pass on info too (this happens far more often than actually visiting the drivers cab, at least in my experience) but as has been said several times in the thread, and rather well by TDK above, train crew are not stupid. They know where and when is suitable.

 

[WestCoast]

Just out of interest, how would you be able to see this on a 67 & DVT? If the driver is in the loco then the only access to him is via the station platform, a good 20 yard walk from the nearest window a passenger could see out of.
If he is in the DVT then the only access to him is via the guards compartment, through the cycle/wheelchair storage and into the cab, which is through four sets of doors from where passengers are seated.

The train was stationary at a platform when the refreshments were delivered. I observed this from the platform, the driver was in the loco. I think it was a member of the catering team rather than the guard. It seemed like a nice gesture.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

Aye, its cool when you have a nice train crew. A few years ago on a spectacularly hot day I once asked our control to pass a message on to a station ahead of me for a glass of water as I was so thirsty it was almost torture. I was met with a glass of water at the next stop and an ice cold can of coke for later on too. Great stuff.

 

[All Line Rover]

I'd be surprised if giving a cup of tea/coffee to the driver is forbidden on VT because of the amount of times it happens. I often hear "beep, beep, beep", "beep, beep, beep" for a few minutes during a journey, until a member of staff magically appears in Coach K or A with a drink! And I've even heard the senior First Class host shouting "the driver wants his coffee!" once or twice.

Regarding the driver keeping his cab door shut, I was once in Coach K on a Pendolino leaving Manchester, and both kitchen doors as well as the cab door were open, so I could see right inside. (Until, that is, the door slammed shut a few minutes later when the train tilted. ) And yes, the TM did bring him a drink!

 

[bb21]

I saw someone robbing a bank once.
I don't intend on reporting that either! :roll:

Your point being?

I really don't understand the big hooha in this thread. The OP asked a question. He is curious. He did not give out any information which could have led to the guard or driver being identified. Why all the aggression? Are people not even allowed to ask questions on things that they don't understand any more?

 

[Greenback]

I am also confused, though it is more because I see staff popping their heads into the cab quite frequently. I'd just like to know if it is against the rules, and if so, which rule it is!

 

[GB]

I do find it interesting to see the rules which staff on this forum feel should be obeyed, and the rules that staff feel can be turned a blind eye to. I'm not trying to stir up anything here, but it does seem to be a 'one rule for the staff, and another for the punters/enthusiasts' a lot of the time here.

Not that I think there's anything wrong with a guard talking to a driver whilst he's working... :roll: Or bringing him a coffee for that matter. As XCDriver says - it's the last bit of comradery left on the network.

But just look at the contrast to this thread, and the infamous Lymmington station master thread where people were baying for blood. Both are staff members flouting the rulebook, but both were received very differently.

And then you have instances where people leap to the defence of the indefensible - such as the time when the FGW driver was reading a newspaper whilst driving.

It's a funny old world... :roll: Sometimes I'm just glad I don't work in the rail industry because the inconsistency would drive me up the wall!

I'm intersted to know which part of the rule book you think is being broken by train crew visiting the driver during the course of their duties?

 

[NightatLaira]

I'm intersted to know which part of the rule book you think is being broken by train crew visiting the driver during the course of their duties?

I don't know the 'rulebook' - I'm just going on previous posts alluding to this being an obviously grey area. Look back at page 1 of this thread to see how members were leaping to the offensive at the topic starter 'not to reveal the time of the train as well' even though he had no intention of doing so.

And for the record, I don't have a problem with coffees being delivered to drivers, I have a problem with grey areas in law and general inconsistency on their applications. Imagine if this driver were now 'disciplined' for his conduct; if there's nothing wrong with delivering a coffee to a working driver during the course of his journey, why not enshrine it in the rulebook so there's no ambiguity? Why wait until some poor unfortunate becomes gets sacrificed over a trivial matter? Perhaps the unions should add this to their next list of demands... Drivers shouldn't have to venture into grey areas of legality just to have a brew, or forsake that pleasure just to stay 'squeaky clean' :roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Your point being?

I really don't understand the big hooha in this thread. The OP asked a question. He is curious. He did not give out any information which could have led to the guard or driver being identified. Why all the aggression? Are people not even allowed to ask questions on things that they don't understand any more?

quite right +1
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Entirely different cases. It's like trying to compare manslaughter with the odd bit of littering.

presumably you don't have a problem with the latter?

 

[tirphil]

TW1 of the Rule Book covers when a guard may travel in the leading cab/communicate with the driver.

(S)he may be in the driving cab for the following;

giving the driver any necessary instructions to do with the safe working of the train.

To co-operate with the driver when asked to do so.

Passing on instructions to the driver from the signaller.

A guard or shunter may travel in the driving cab when authorised in connection with his duties.

 

[Greenback]

I don't know the 'rulebook' - I'm just going on previous posts alluding to this being an obviously grey area. Look back at page 1 of this thread to see how members were leaping to the offensive at the topic starter 'not to reveal the time of the train as well' even though he had no intention of doing so.

And for the record, I don't have a problem with coffees being delivered to drivers, I have a problem with grey areas in law and general inconsistency on their applications. Imagine if this driver were now 'disciplined' for his conduct; if there's nothing wrong with delivering a coffee to a working driver during the course of his journey, why not enshrine it in the rulebook so there's no ambiguity? Why wait until some poor unfortunate becomes gets sacrificed over a trivial matter? Perhaps the unions should add this to their next list of demands... Drivers shouldn't have to venture into grey areas of legality just to have a brew, or forsake that pleasure just to stay 'squeaky clean' :roll:

Well, I for one don't know the rulebooks, and I am not going to read anything into other posts by people who may or may not know the rulebook either!

So we don't know what the rulebook actually says, which is why I asked whether visiting the cab is not allowed and which rule says it. I have certainly seen plenty of conductors go and tell the driver if a request stop has been asked for, but I still don't know if there are any rules, or any grey areas!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

TW1 of the Rule Book covers when a guard may travel in the leading cab/communicate with the driver.

(S)he may be in the driving cab for the following;

giving the driver any necessary instructions to do with the safe working of the train.

To co-operate with the driver when asked to do so.

Passing on instructions to the driver from the signaller.

A guard or shunter may travel in the driving cab when authorised in connection with his duties.

I do now, thanks Tirphil!

 

[BestWestern]

In answer to the original question, all those many posts ago, and without paying too much heed to the inevitable 'post war' which has now broken out just for a change.... :roll:

A Guard accessing the driving cab whilst a train is moving, unless strictly for one of the reasons stated in the rule book - nearly all of which would be advised first to the the Signaller and to the TOC's Control - is risking his/her job. There are few Managers who wouldn't report it, and few TOCs who won't go through the procedures for it. And saying that you were just passing 'vital information' to the Driver, of that the Driver was a bit poorly and asked you to, etc etc, will hold no water, those reasons aren't valid and they won't buy it. It's one of the strictest issues now at most, if not all TOCs.

Whether that's right or wrong we can debate forever, but opening that door is a very, very foolish thing to do. It's perhaps more discreet on something like a Voyager or Pendo where, I presume, you are out of sight of both passenger and CCTV, but on a unit it's pretty blatant. Whilst some might argue that it poses no real safety issue, that the cab-to-cab is more of a distraction, or that shouting through the door for a request stop is better than using the official buzzer codes or whatever, the fact is that TOCs will hang you for it. There have been SPAD incidents in which unauthorised access to the driving cab has been sited as a contributary factor, and that is all the ammo that is needed to slap a pretty sturdy ban on it.

As for cab doors swinging open, it's not ideal and again a Comp Manager would certainly pick you up for it.

To the OP, it would if course be a tad unsporting to go around dropping people in it, but of course you didn't suggest you had thoughts on doing so, and from your suitably undetailed first post nobody will be tracing any guilty parties, so I fail to see why all the fuss about you posting, but hey ho!

 

[NightatLaira]

In answer to the original question, all those many posts ago, and without paying too much heed to the inevitable 'post war' which has now broken out just for a change.... :roll:

A Guard accessing the driving cab whilst a train is moving, unless strictly for one of the reasons stated in the rule book - nearly all of which would be advised first to the the Signaller and to the TOC's Control - is risking his/her job. There are few Managers who wouldn't report it, and few TOCs who won't go through the procedures for it. And saying that you were just passing 'vital information' to the Driver, of that the Driver was a bit poorly and asked you to, etc etc, will hold no water, those reasons aren't valid and they won't buy it. It's one of the strictest issues now at most, if not all TOCs.

Whether that's right or wrong we can debate forever, but opening that door is a very, very foolish thing to do. It's perhaps more discreet on something like a Voyager or Pendo where, I presume, you are out of sight of both passenger and CCTV, but on a unit it's pretty blatant. Whilst some might argue that it poses no real safety issue, that the cab-to-cab is more of a distraction, or that shouting through the door for a request stop is better than using the official buzzer codes or whatever, the fact is that TOCs will hang you for it. There have been SPAD incidents in which unauthorised access to the driving cab has been sited as a contributary factor, and that is all the ammo that is needed to slap a pretty sturdy ban on it.

As for cab doors swinging open, it's not ideal and again a Comp Manager would certainly pick you up for it.

To the OP, it would if course be a tad unsporting to go around dropping people in it, but of course you didn't suggest you had thoughts on doing so, and from your suitably undetailed first post nobody will be tracing any guilty parties, so I fail to see why all the fuss about you posting, but hey ho!

No doubt uncomfortable reading for some, but well said! A good summary to this strangely contentious post.

 

[TDK]

The train was stationary at a platform when the refreshments were delivered. I observed this from the platform, the driver was in the loco. I think it was a member of the catering team rather than the guard. It seemed like a nice gesture.

Yes indeed they were the days - Message to guard - Bacon bap, coffee and some toast and marmalade at your convenience please and the fantastic WSMR staff would always deliver the goods where requested by the driver.

The drivers' were always fed and watered with WSMR

 

[455driver]

The OP asked about a guard being in the cab for a matter of seconds and everyone is on about the guard TRAVELLING in the cab! FFS get a grip!:roll:

We all know that guards cannot TRAVEL in the leading cab (except in certain circumstances) but sticking their nose in for a few seconds hardly constitutes travelling does it.

 

[whhistle]

Your point being?

I really don't understand the big hooha in this thread. The OP asked a question. He is curious. He did not give out any information which could have led to the guard or driver being identified. Why all the aggression?

My point being:

If the OP thought it was some sort of safety issue then surely it should be reported no matter what?

If the OP didn't think this, it may have been wise to ask it as a stand alone question, not as an experience-based question.

Don't get me wrong, I am not on either side with this, my only issue is the fact the OP has stated they aren't going to report it, so the way the post was written does lead to a little confusion and perhaps a conflict of interest which may have contributed to the "aggression" in the thread.

 

[GB]

The rule book does not define the specific circumstances or scenarios where a member of staff other than the driver can be in the cab, only that it should be in connection with their duties and it should be authorised.

TW1, 3.1

You must give all instructions to the driver by one of the following
ways:
• direct (face to face), or
• direct (via telephone or radio), or
• through the guard, shunter, pilotman, handsignaller, or
• through any other person who is competent in the relevant rules.

You will receive the signaller’s instructions by one of the following
ways:
• direct (face to face)
• direct (via telephone or radio)
• through the guard, shunter, pilotman, handsignaller
• through any other person who is competent in the relevant rules.

So to say passing vital information to the driver will not hold up is incorrect.

TW1, 5

You may only allow the following personnel to travel in a driving
cab:
• Another driver in the course of his duties.
• A guard or shunter when authorised in connection with his
duties.
• A rolling stock technician in connection with his duties.
• A pilotman.
• A person authorised by the local Network Rail area operations
manager when carrying out duties in connection with an
emergency.
• A person authorised by the PICOP or Engineering Supervisor
to give instructions regarding the movement of your train in a
possession.
• The holder of a driving cab pass.

 

[Grantham]

TW1 of the Rule Book covers when a guard may travel in the leading cab/communicate with the driver.

(S)he may be in the driving cab for the following;

giving the driver any necessary instructions to do with the safe working of the train.

To co-operate with the driver when asked to do so.

Passing on instructions to the driver from the signaller.

A guard or shunter may travel in the driving cab when authorised in connection with his duties.

I don't see any reason why the guard shouldn't poke his nose into the cab on his own initiative, especially if there is something he is co-operating with the driver. It doesn't hurt to be proactive about co-operation, even the most retarded manager would see that.

M

 

[The Snap]

Judging by the reaction from the train staff on here whenever an innocent question about the rules of the railway is asked, I'm intrigued to know of any instances where postings on websites such as this have resulted in disciplinary action being taken on rail staff...?

If there haven’t been any, I would suggest that your reactions are way over the top!! Of course, if there have been, then perhaps you have a case…

If I was to play the Devil's Advocate to the extreme, I would also suggest that if you're that scared of being dropped in it by postings on the internet, perhaps you shouldn’t break the rules in the first place?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Judging by the reaction from the train staff on here whenever an innocent question about the rules of the railway is asked, I'm intrigued to know of any instances where postings on websites such as this have resulted in disciplinary action being taken on rail staff...?

There have indeed been cases like this, although not on this forum. Just read this thread: http://www.railchat.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=15145

 

[150222]

My point being:

If the OP thought it was some sort of safety issue then surely it should be reported no matter what?

If the OP didn't think this, it may have been wise to ask it as a stand alone question, not as an experience-based question.

Don't get me wrong, I am not on either side with this, my only issue is the fact the OP has stated they aren't going to report it, so the way the post was written does lead to a little confusion and perhaps a conflict of interest which may have contributed to the "aggression" in the thread.

Just one of the many reasons why I am not going to report it is I DID NOT KNOW IF IT WAS ALLOWED OR NOT!

 

[tony_mac]

The OP asked about a guard being in the cab for a matter of seconds and everyone is on about the guard TRAVELLING in the cab! FFS get a grip!:roll:

We all know that guards cannot TRAVEL in the leading cab (except in certain circumstances) but sticking their nose in for a few seconds hardly constitutes travelling does it.

Thanks for the information, it answered my question.

I did see the guard spend an entire journey in the drivers cab recently.
I am surprised it is such an issue as they weren't exactly subtle about it - I was waiting by the door at the final stop and wondered where the laughter was coming from.....

 

[tom1649]

I am also confused, though it is more because I see staff popping their heads into the cab quite frequently. I'd just like to know if it is against the rules, and if so, which rule it is!

Yes, it happens all the time around here, and always has done. I never realised it could be a problem. Certainly on some lines the guard would almost always head to the cab to tell the driver if any request stops are required.

 

[Old Timer]

Actually a former member of this forum was subject to suspension and disciplinary charges by his TOC over some postings made on here about two years ago.

It got as serious as it could have done.

 

[richw]

There have indeed been cases like this, although not on this forum. Just read this thread: http://www.railchat.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=15145

Would you be able to summarise, requires signing up to view the thread, thanks.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Actually a former member of this forum was subject to suspension and disciplinary charges by his TOC over some postings made on here about two years ago.

It got as serious as it could have done.

one of my colleagues was dismissed a couple of years ago for comments on the internet about the company!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Would you be able to summarise, requires signing up to view the thread, thanks.

Someone was caught out and demoted, a few others had to have their ID's changed because they had been found out.

 

[Buttsy]

A number of years ago on a 2 car 150 from Warrington to Chester on race day, I ended up with a couple of others in the rear cab with the guard (we were stood up with him watching us like a hawk) as it was the only way we could avoid crush conditions. He was very obliging and we appreciated the extra room. It also helped him get to the door controls at the 3-4 stops we had before Chester.

There was no way I would've considered reporting him, as he was using a touch of common sense in the conditions.