Any ideas what the Government is going to suggest?

[phil8715]

Buying tickets in Post offices and libraries? We could if they didn't close them all. I live in a semi rural village( insert village idiot jokes here) and my post office and library shuts half day Wednesdays and Saturdays.

The oyster smart card would be a good idea if it was a standard standard fixed fare, how would they go about long distance journeys for instance Rishton to London? There many fares for that journey, it would mean having to top up £1k per month and install spy machines in libraries.

Unless its meant for just local journeys.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[yorksrob]

Buying tickets in Post offices and libraries? We could if they didn't close them all. I live in a semi rural village( insert village idiot jokes here) and my post office and library shuts half day Wednesdays and Saturdays.

Why not double up some rural stations as post offices - rather than leaving villages without either.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Including Germany

Indeed - and Germany's hardly a communist basket case !

 

[exile]

If I am emotive so be it, how many times on this forum have we seen get rid of the guard, dont need a guard etc etc, but as usual when people are not directly affected (understandably) they just think of £ and not the true cost which in human terms is far greater, This McNumpty report has everyone except Drivers worried and with good reason, I fear the future of myself and thousands of colleagues and that I will not apologize for.

We all have jobs which we can't afford to lose. Remember when buses had conductors? And locomotives had second men? We need arguments that focus on why conductors and guards are actually needed. The best ones must surely be to do with passenger safety - but as has been pointed out DOO has been used on various parts of the network (most notably London Underground)

 

[jon0844]

As rail usage goes up, I'd probably rather have more staff at stations (from start of service to end of service) than having to put an extra member of staff on every train.

As more trains run, you'd need more and more staff and could the industry afford it? Or if it needed such staff, due to some form of Government legislation, wouldn't you expect them to get less duties and less pay as a result? (I don't mean agree, but expect).

Of course it would be great to have more staff everywhere, including a police officer on every late night train (or two) but that's not realistic as passenger numbers grow and we get more services running.

For an Intercity service, charged at a premium, I see the need for staff on the train. For commuter services, I see DOO being just fine. I've never felt at risk on the train because there's no guard. Sure, in any accident, you'd probably wish there was someone else on the train - who wasn't also injured.

We have to accept a level of risk which is why we aren't putting seat belts on trains, and changing the interiors on all rolling stock. In fact, this forum always states that the risks are so low - you don't need to waste money on making them accident-proof. I guess that has to apply to staff too. Bob Crow might disagree, but I am sure that a more important safety feature is to have trains that can alert people automatically in the event of an incident - so help will be on its way in seconds.

But, back to the point, I don't want to see staff made redundant - but used more effectively because things ARE going to change in the next 10, 20 and 50 years.

 

[exile]

As a passenger I feel more in need of staff when there are few other passengers about - safety in numbers I suppose.

 

[IanXC]

I think there are plenty of ways to improve efficiency (at a local level) long before we get to DOO. The need for non commercial guards to do revenue and for an end to 3 staff on 2 car services for a start!

 

[jon0844]

As a passenger I feel more in need of staff when there are few other passengers about - safety in numbers I suppose.

I agree, but I can't see how - say FCC (as the TOC I use most) - could put a guard on every train it runs, especially when they run a 365 in 12-car configuration - meaning the need for three members of staff. Even then, they must walk up and down the train to be of any real use.

Of course, they did have security staff for a while that worked nights and weekends - with limited success. Limited because the security staff didn't do anything but walk through the train as quickly as possible and sit down in first class, playing or chatting on their mobiles for the rest of the journey (okay, maybe not all of them - but I saw that enough times for it to be pretty common). In some cases, they seemed rather too chummy with the people they were supposed to be keeping in line - perhaps they'd argue that this was a way of building trust, but it could be because they didn't give a damn or actually knew the very scrotes the train company was trying to keep off the railway.

Perhaps more staff on late trains could be looked at, or special carriages that are staffed (even if not on every service) for people to feel secure. In Australia, I saw these special areas on platforms that were brightly lit and under CCTV, so that's another idea for using staff more effectively.

The railway industry needs people - so sacking staff to save money wouldn't be a good idea. I doubt either the public or private sector think this either - any half decent private company will realise how important its staff are.

More staff will indeed make people feel safer, which may increase usage and redress the balance in favour of the honest, law-abiding passengers at certain times. Staff that aren't in a protected office but out on the station platforms would also be more reassuring at night, as I can't really imagine being much safer with the knowledge that someone is sitting in a ticket office reading the paper between serving customers, while I'm being attacked outside!

 

[phil8715]

Wasn't the ASLEF strike in the 80's to do with flexible rostering and making trains single man instead of having a secondman?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Nonsense]

The railways will be structured and restructured ad nauseum, and jobs will inevitably be lost, and sometime new jobs will be created

Joblessness really really does suck. I've been there, too often, but I've always found other work, even if it wasn't my chosen sector/profession. I, like most others, would rather see a railway fully manned and staffed by an army of staff dedicated to the successful completion of my journey but economic realities are somewhat different.

There is no such thing as a job for life and we all have the responsibility to protect ourselves from the prospect of unemployment, and relying on the unions isn't the answer.

The miners strikes of the eighties didn't make foreign coal less attractive than our own, and likewise, if the railways are found to be operable without the role of the guard, no amount of protest will change that. If you're a guard, and you're worried about your career, now is the time to look at the alternatives.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The railways will be structured and restructured ad nauseum, and jobs will inevitably be lost, and sometime new jobs will be created

Joblessness really really does suck. I've been there, too often, but I've always found other work, even if it wasn't my chosen sector/profession. I, like most others, would rather see a railway fully manned and staffed by an army of staff dedicated to the successful completion of my journey but economic realities are somewhat different.

There is no such thing as a job for life and we all have the responsibility to protect ourselves from the prospect of unemployment, and relying on the unions isn't the answer.

The miners strikes of the eighties didn't make foreign coal less attractive than our own, and likewise, if the railways are found to be operable without the role of the guard, no amount of protest will change that. If you're a guard, and you're worried about your career, now is the time to look at the alternatives.

Quite right.
The DfT figures show that Northern passengers pay only 22% of the TOCs costs, while Greater Anglia passengers pay 83% (the taxpayer - you and me - paying the rest).
It's much the same in other "regional" TOCs (ATW, Scotrail etc) and even in some "inter-city" TOCs (TPE for instance).
The government is simply saying this is unsustainable in the long term.
The industry has to find a solution, or services will have to be cut.
That won't do a lot for employment either.

 

[IanXC]

Quite right.
The DfT figures show that Northern passengers pay only 22% of the TOCs costs, while Greater Anglia passengers pay 83% (the taxpayer - you and me - paying the rest).
It's much the same in other "regional" TOCs (ATW, Scotrail etc) and even in some "inter-city" TOCs (TPE for instance).
The government is simply saying this is unsustainable in the long term.
The industry has to find a solution, or services will have to be cut.
That won't do a lot for employment either.

Absolutely. Its worth mentioning that theres a big difference between PTE areas and non PTE areas too.

 

[AlanFry1]

What the government and us need to do is think of the railways less as a business and more a public service

 

[ANorthernGuard]

I do love the fact that the government created a lot of this mess with privatisation, up north I think we have about 15 years left with guards on trains due to the poor infrastructure and old trains and the people who will suffer the most when we are gone is you aka the passengers so enjoy it while it lasts because our railways will become an even bigger joke then they are now.

 

[northwichcat]

The DfT figures show that Northern passengers pay only 22% of the TOCs costs, while Greater Anglia passengers pay 83% (the taxpayer - you and me - paying the rest).
It's much the same in other "regional" TOCs (ATW, Scotrail etc) and even in some "inter-city" TOCs (TPE for instance).
The government is simply saying this is unsustainable in the long term.
The industry has to find a solution, or services will have to be cut.
That won't do a lot for employment either.

The point about Pacer running costs comes in to play here. A Pacer is cheaper to run than a Sprinter but it is shorter and provides less capacity. If you start running Pacers in multiple they are an expensive option. It's much cheaper to provide 300 seats using 153/155/156 combinations than it is using 142/143/144 combinations.

 

[Flamingo]

Guards on trains are kinda like the police, or the NHS for that matter. They are not required until something goes wrong, then they are essential. That is what we get paid the money for.

I keep reiterating this point on this forum, but will say it again for the hard of thinking - Revenue (ticket checking) is not the primary role of the guard, but something they do when their other roles allow it. We do not receive our money for ticket checking, but for the knowledge and skills we can apply in the event of trouble (from whatever source) on-board the train..

Think of the guard as being the first line of the 999 services available on the train, not 15 minutes away at the end of a telephone line, and you have a better idea of the role.

 

[notadriver]

Flamingo with the greatest respect to you - and I do mean that do you not think that in order to safeguard jobs and to keep a second person on the train, that the guard should no longer consider checking tickets and customer service a secondary responsibility but the primary one?

 

[ANorthernGuard]

Flamingo with the greatest respect to you - and I do mean that do you not think that in order to safeguard jobs and to keep a second person on the train, that the guard should no longer consider checking tickets and customer service a secondary responsibility but the primary one?

I do see where your coming from but you can never put anything over safety and performance, I carry out revenue on almost every trip I do but only when it does not interfere with safety and performance

 

[DarloRich]

Guards on trains are kinda like the police, or the NHS for that matter. They are not required until something goes wrong, then they are essential. That is what we get paid the money for.

I keep reiterating this point on this forum, but will say it again for the hard of thinking - Revenue (ticket checking) is not the primary role of the guard, but something they do when their other roles allow it. We do not receive our money for ticket checking, but for the knowledge and skills we can apply in the event of trouble (from whatever source) on-board the train..

Think of the guard as being the first line of the 999 services available on the train, not 15 minutes away at the end of a telephone line, and you have a better idea of the role.

You can say that till you are blue in the face. Many people (wrongly) assume the guard is there simply to check tickets. They don’t have the understanding or inclination to acknowledge any other, more important, role. Most assume you are their simply to clip tickets.

They have no understanding that in the event of any unpleasantness it is the guard who you are relying on to protect both the train and the running line. It is the guard who is going to be the initial response first aider, it is the guard who will have to guide the emergency services to the train and try and sort out all the passengers and start getting them to a position of safety

Obviously he will be assisted by the driver and other on train staff (if they are in a position to do so) but the safety critical role of the guard is, well, critical, to the safe operation of the train.

Now who thinks getting rid of them would be a good idea? ( apart from Mr NcNutjob)

 

[phil8715]

I live in East Lancashire and we still have the trains we had since before privatisation. We must be the only area not to get new trains. We still have the 142's/150's/153/155/156158's.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[HSTEd]

I live in East Lancashire and we still have the trains we had since before privatisation. We must be the only area not to get new trains. We still have the 142's/150's/153/155/156158's.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Grantham, the only non BR stock to stop is the Cl180s for Hull Trains five times a day.
Cl91s, HSTs, Cl158s, Cl156s, Cl153s....

 

[blacknight]

Like you've said yourself if Northern Rail guards were cut back that could well mean a number of third party ticket inspection employees could go up, so the guards would be able to apply for those 'new' jobs. The problem will be that the redundant guards would have to accept lower salaries if they wanted the new roles.

By why of third party ticket inspections are you suggesting this should be sub contracted to non train operaters companies of the likes of G4S.
Pay peanuts & you end up with monkeys.
Why should rail staff have enforced pay cuts with worse terms & conditions of employment just so BUB's have cheaper tickets.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That has never been the aim. The aim is to cut the amount fares increase by. When commuter's salaries are increasing at a much lower level than inflation, having fares which increase by above the rate of inflation is something that can't continue unless the aim is for passenger numbers to fall and if passenger numbers fall then that means less services and less crews required.

Do rail staff now set rate of annual fares increases? How many millions have EC just paid to DfT surely D.O.R is the way forward why use profits to fund shareholders?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

You can say that till you are blue in the face. Many people (wrongly) assume the guard is there simply to check tickets. They don’t have the understanding or inclination to acknowledge any other, more important, role. Most assume you are their simply to clip tickets.

They have no understanding that in the event of any unpleasantness it is the guard who you are relying on to protect both the train and the running line. It is the guard who is going to be the initial response first aider, it is the guard who will have to guide the emergency services to the train and try and sort out all the passengers and start getting them to a position of safety

Obviously he will be assisted by the driver and other on train staff (if they are in a position to do so) but the safety critical role of the guard is, well, critical, to the safe operation of the train.

Now who thinks getting rid of them would be a good idea? ( apart from Mr NcNutjob)

Well how do they manage without a guard on FCC then?
As I understand it, classes 317/319/365/377 and maybe others operate perfectly safely under DOO.
Wouldn't it be logical to extend DOO operation as these trains get redeployed elsewhere (eg Thames Valley, Northern) on newly electrified lines?
I know there is investment needed in station kit as well, so it might not be used everywhere, but why not on the new local Lancashire services?

 

[northwichcat]

By why of third party ticket inspections are you suggesting this should be sub contracted to non train operaters companies of the likes of G4S.
Pay peanuts & you end up with monkeys.
Why should rail staff have enforced pay cuts with worse terms & conditions of employment just so BUB's have cheaper tickets.

It was ANorthernGuard who suggested earlier in the thread that if a guard's role was reduced to ticket inspection only that G4S would take over.

Do rail staff now set rate of annual fares increases? How many millions have EC just paid to DfT surely D.O.R is the way forward why use profits to fund shareholders?

What has that got to do with it? Are you saying that if passenger numbers drop due to no longer being able to afford fares and services are reduced that the drivers and guards will be kept on even though they won't be required?

 

[jon0844]

Well how do they manage without a guard on FCC then?

Indeed, and with the 317 and 377/5s excepted, they regular run trains in multiple and that would make it impossible for a guard to get through the whole train.

On an 8-car you could perhaps have a driver up front and a guard in the rear set, but what to do on a 12-car train?

The new TL trains may be in fixed formations that will allow for a guard to walk through the whole train, but there will be a high capacity service (up to 24tph through the core) so that's an awful lot of staff. Forget job losses, this would require a huge number of new staff that would increase costs further.

For the railway to be affordable in the future, I am imagining more DOO and not less. Intercity trains, or trains with reserved seats and the provision of food and drink, will be exceptions. These are more comparable to air travel, where people expect a service - although when you get HS2 running trains quickly, I wonder if people will still expect such service, or will think of such trains as little different to a suburban commuter train?

Another idea, which I may get shot down for, is for there to be trolleys that serve food and drink to passengers, giving a commercial benefit to the TOC, but with the staff trained to deal with incidents, administer first aid or deal with fare information and basic ticketing duties. It would mean a higher salary and almost certainly rule out G4S providing such staff. The driver would still deal with the running of the train, including doors.

 

[Captain Chaos]

I think it is important to remember that the report has stated that DOO should be implemented except where there is believed to be a commercial, operational or safety reasons for doing so. I may very well be ok as we take fairly large sums of money on our shifts and there are operational reasons for keeping us (Bourne End GF springs to mind). I fear that the largest cuts are going to be in Northern regions.

What I find most interesting is that the government 'accepts' the arguments for it but doesn't appear to commit to it. If I remember rightly it does state somewhere that further franchises will be awarded on the TOC's ability to reduce costs. So I guess we can say goodbye to First Group on FGW then? They have always seemed keen to keep Guards on their trains or at least have a TE. They have just hired 50 or so TE's (maybe this is the future? TE's instead of Guards?)

It appears that the Government wants it but wants the TOC's to say and do it for them. Whoever wins the next round of franchises is going to have a thoroughly miserable time...

 

[AlanFry1]

The best thing to do is set up the process for full renationalisation

 

[blacknight]

Another idea, which I may get shot down for, is for there to be trolleys that serve food and drink to passengers, giving a commercial benefit to the TOC, but with the staff trained to deal with incidents, administer first aid or deal with fare information and basic ticketing duties. It would mean a higher salary and almost certainly rule out G4S providing such staff. The driver would still deal with the running of the train, including doors.

Is that not the role discription for a train guard duties as it stands ATM & to deal with "incidents" would these trolley hosts not have to have been given Safety Critical training.

 

[jon0844]

As usage goes up, wouldn't future improvements mean more trains running up north? If so, and the new trains become DOO, then wouldn't (or shouldn't) guards have the first refusal on training to become drivers?

 

[DarloRich]

Well how do they manage without a guard on FCC then?
As I understand it, classes 317/319/365/377 and maybe others operate perfectly safely under DOO.
Wouldn't it be logical to extend DOO operation as these trains get redeployed elsewhere (eg Thames Valley, Northern) on newly electrified lines?
I know there is investment needed in station kit as well, so it might not be used everywhere, but why not on the new local Lancashire services?

A very good question that will only be answered when something, god forbid, goes badly wrong.

 

[blacknight]

What has that got to do with it? Are you saying that if passenger numbers drop due to no longer being able to afford fares and services are reduced that the drivers and guards will be kept on even though they won't be required?

In recent months myth of high train fares as grown problem with train fares ATM is there's an inbalance between price of AP tickets & walk up fares.
Put AP tickets on peak services & shrewd business passengers are going to opt for the AP ticket option