ASLEF and RMT agree: no more DOO or DCO

[andrewkeith5]

Yep. I don't understand why the RMT don't articulate this point.
I'd agree it's very likely that guards (or whatever we'll be called under DCO) will be expected to be out patrolling all trains including late services on Friday/Saturday nights. Personally it's not a role I relish and I didn't sign up to be a customer service/security guard on the late trains out of Picc.

I understand and accept that passengers want a presence out in the carriages on these services. I guess I just don't want to be performing that role for my job. I'll need to move on to another job if/when this comes to pass.

So, purely out of interest, what did you think you were signing up to? Is a train guard not meant to be a member of the front-line customer service staff? For many people the train guard and the occasional cleaner are the only representatives of the railway they get to interact with...

 

[A-driver]

So, purely out of interest, what did you think you were signing up to? Is a train guard not meant to be a member of the front-line customer service staff? For many people the train guard and the occasional cleaner are the only representatives of the railway they get to interact with...

A guards role is not to break up fights, solve disputes between passengers, tell drinks to quieten down or kick people off trains who are vomiting up all over the place. That's what the police are there for. Guards receive very little training in dealing with aggressive or drunk people and their employer will not stand by them if they get involved in a brawl or get injured or attacked by someone whilst breaking up drunken fights etc-the guard is only to report such things and await police assistance.

So I'd guess that the poster was not signing up to do that but signing up to operate the doors and dispatch passenger trains along with checking tickets, providing info regarding connections, announcing stations where no auto pa is set up, getting disruption updates from control and passing head on via the pa and keeping them up to date with delays.

 

[northwichcat]

A guards role is not to break up fights, solve disputes between passengers, tell drinks to quieten down or kick people off trains who are vomiting up all over the place. That's what the police are there for.

Yes but who can arrange for BTP to meet the train to sort out the problem? The guard maybe?

 

[muz379]

A guards role is not to break up fights, solve disputes between passengers, tell drinks to quieten down or kick people off trains who are vomiting up all over the place. That's what the police are there for. Guards receive very little training in dealing with aggressive or drunk people and their employer will not stand by them if they get involved in a brawl or get injured or attacked by someone whilst breaking up drunken fights etc-the guard is only to report such things and await police assistance.

So I'd guess that the poster was not signing up to do that but signing up to operate the doors and dispatch passenger trains along with checking tickets, providing info regarding connections, announcing stations where no auto pa is set up, getting disruption updates from control and passing head on via the pa and keeping them up to date with delays.

This 100%

I did not sign up to deal with aggression , fights , verbally abusive drunks or verbally abusive sober folk . Which is why as soon as things start turning that way I walk away and return to my back cab , reporting it to the police if there is an ongoing threat to safety of staff or passengers

Had I wanted to do that I would have held out and joined the police like I always wanted to do then I would have been equipped with sufficient training and PPE to deal with those incidents .

 

[andrewkeith5]

This 100%

I did not sign up to deal with aggression , fights , verbally abusive drunks or verbally abusive sober folk . Which is why as soon as things start turning that way I walk away and return to my back cab , reporting it to the police if there is an ongoing threat to safety of staff or passengers

Had I wanted to do that I would have held out and joined the police like I always wanted to do then I would have been equipped with sufficient training and PPE to deal with those incidents .

That's fair enough, of course, and I wouldn't expect you to.

That isn't quite the same as what the post I originally quoted said, though. The post I quoted inferred that the job of a guard is not to patrol trains, including those late at night - I was challenging that it is to patrol trains.

Obviously in certain circumstances it is probably better to be out of the way, but do the situations you describe really happen on every single evening or late evening service? If so, there's a much bigger problem that needs solving. In my experience the visible staffing of late evening trains is woefully variable, but mostly very lacking. Part of the prevention of crime is having visible staff on board to deter anyone who is 'on the edge' from going 'over the edge'.

 

[387star]

deleted

 

[FordFocus]

But of course any new employees (including crew members who transfer from other operators) could have it written in to their contracts from the outset. If they don't agree then they'll forfeit the job offer.

That would have 2 stumbling points. The union will not accept a two tiered contract, one with DOO and everyone else without. The other is even though Northern have a higher turnover of staff than other TOCs it would take a substantial amount of time, least 20 years until you even have the numbers for it.

While I accept the RMT might ballot on industrial action I don't see how a conductor can act as an AFC now but not as a conductor on a DCO service - that person will be doing the same role.

You've missed the point there slightly. The issue is of who controls the door in a time of CPS now going for prosecutions along with the ORR of staff, more injuries and investigations for RAIB of people been dragged by trains on narrow platforms. AFCs are there to assist in collecting fares, the reason conductor have been doing it is that Northern were slow to reintroduce a similar grade called RPAs and agency staff are forbidden to sell on board.

It'd be interesting to see how the unions react if and when the TOC offers incentives for going over to "DCO". Will the unions really want to reject pay rises, more holidays etc. if they have to accept "DCO" to get them?

Northern had 12 years to harmonise terms and conditions for traincrew between FNW and ATN and failed on numerous occasions, the terms of service were too different for many reasons. With this announcement of no DOO or "DCO" it will be thrown out of the meeting straight away. Staff don't want it and Northern or whoever won't throw an endless pot of money down this avenue.

 

[387star]

Also of note is fgw tms and I think southern conductors only have their jobs secured for x number of years presumably to make it easier to change conditions etc

 

[muz379]

That's fair enough, of course, and I wouldn't expect you to.

That isn't quite the same as what the post I originally quoted said, though. The post I quoted inferred that the job of a guard is not to patrol trains, including those late at night - I was challenging that it is to patrol trains.

Obviously in certain circumstances it is probably better to be out of the way, but do the situations you describe really happen on every single evening or late evening service? If so, there's a much bigger problem that needs solving. In my experience the visible staffing of late evening trains is woefully variable, but mostly very lacking. Part of the prevention of crime is having visible staff on board to deter anyone who is 'on the edge' from going 'over the edge'.

The issue of patrolling is currently left to a guards discretion , sometimes I patrol but do not do revenue late fri/sat . And sometimes I dont because the train is very busy , there has been something notorious for trouble like a football matches or other sports fixtures .or when boarding at the start station there have been a number of rowdy passengers on the platform

The problem with patrolling but not doing revenue is that people immediately see the uniform and expect that you are trying to check tickets etc which then means those that have been brewing for a confrontation start off straight away so patrolling the train in uniform can bring issues

I believe the post you quoted was in direct relation to this issue of banning guards form rear cabs when DCO comes in and expect them to patrol all trains . This is something as a guard I am strongly against and the TOC would never be able to enforce it anyway

My experience is majority late Saturday nights there will be an element on the train which means that many guards would not feel it safe to patrol .Most weekday evening apart form Friday I do revenue on most if not all trains up to the last one unless again there has been a specific event on

As a guard I agree there is a wider problem that needs solving . But given the open nature of the network it is not going to happen . I would happily see the implementation of a merseyrail system turning passengers away who are too heavily intoxicated even if it is the last train but the cost of this is prohibitive .

 

[northwichcat]

You've missed the point there slightly. The issue is of who controls the door in a time of CPS now going for prosecutions along with the ORR of staff, more injuries and investigations for RAIB of people been dragged by trains on narrow platforms. AFCs are there to assist in collecting fares, the reason conductor have been doing it is that Northern were slow to reintroduce a similar grade called RPAs and agency staff are forbidden to sell on board.

Conductors acting as AFC don't touch the doors except in an emergency, so it seems they are happy to undertake such a role if one of their conductor colleagues is doing the doors but not if the driver is.

If the conductors think that difference makes it unsafe for them do they refuse to travel on other operator's services which are DOO or DCO for safety reasons?

If the unions are saying it's unsafe for passengers shouldn't the unions be submitting evidence of why that is the case to bodies like Rail North, Transport Focus and Travel Watch who are interested in getting the best deal for passengers?

Someone earlier made the point about in the South East there being long formations which only just fit on the platforms and are DOO, surely DCO in the North on 2 car services where platforms can easily take 4+ cars would be safer and would make more sense than DOO in the South East?

 

[FordFocus]

When I was a guard I patrolled trains but never did revenue on late Friday/Saturday night trains as it was extremely problematic and hostile. It was reassuring to passengers to see someone in uniform obviously one person can't split up 10 people fighting but there was some customer service skill with the simple questions of 'how many stops until?'

The reason a lot of guards didn't patrol in my area is because of lack of PA handsets in the train with people missing their stop and blaming lack of announcements and only door controls in the rear cab. No good for stopping every 3 minutes. TOCs need to fit door controls inside the carriage whilst retaining the cab door controls for overcrowding and special working.

 

[tsr]

I will be the first to put my hands up and say that I must be fairly unusual on this forum (maybe not in the wider industry) that I have (depending on railway job role) usually enjoyed and even sometimes got a bit of a buzz out of patrolling trains and stations, which is often independent of and a lot more important than just checking tickets when you're talking about trains.

I won't break up fights and I will walk away from dangerous threats just like the next member of staff, because I don't get a buzz out of an unnecessarily heightened risk to my train, myself or others, but it's so nice to see that a visible presence (and a non-threatening one - for example, checking out a door or toilet problem and being seen to lend a helping hand) gives reassurance to passengers and lets them have an appropriate point of contact. If someone wants a ticket you can of course sell it, but it can be that doing a quick patrol is of more value to the company, and it's entirely possible to decide to do that and end up making a real difference to passengers.

From my professional eyes I can very often tell when I board an evening or overnight train if the guard has been visibly patrolling (if of course dispatch positions & overcrowding permit), or if it's DOO I generally find more issues such as low-level vandalism and antisocial behaviour. To say that major crime is a big problem is of course mostly untrue anyway as most lines are by and large pretty safe places, but atmosphere can still be much, much better with a visible presence, and it can lead to much better job satisfaction.

 

[387star]

Why not ensure all DOO stations have safety critical platform staff through to the last trains

This makes everything better.. Promotes a safer pleasanter station environment whilst protecting the pti as presumably once the driver gets going he is focussing on the road not what is behind him

Since I joined the railways I have witnessed many cutbacks...

When I started at Bognor and Littlehampton on nights we dispatched every train. Then that changed to only a train longer than a 4 car

Meanwhile Barnham Chichester etc lost their dispatch right though the staff there are still safety critical trained so enjoy a decent salary still... Might be because they are ex BR and some are ex drivers. It means they can cover stations like Bognor where dispatch is required as well.

 

[northwichcat]

When I was a guard I patrolled trains but never did revenue on late Friday/Saturday night trains as it was extremely problematic and hostile. It was reassuring to passengers to see someone in uniform obviously one person can't split up 10 people fighting but there was some customer service skill with the simple questions of 'how many stops until?'

Some have the approach of making themselves available to sell tickets, without insisting everyone either shows a ticket or buys one.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why not ensure all DOO stations have safety critical platform staff through to the last trains

Personally I think the LU approach of having dispatchers with handsets linked in to the station PA system is better than having a guard at stations where there's large numbers boarding/alighting and long formations. The dispatcher is in a better place to take action if someone on the platform tries to do something stupid either before the train stops or after the doors have closed.

 

[FordFocus]

Conductors acting as AFC don't touch the doors except in an emergency, so it seems they are happy to undertake such a role if one of their conductor colleagues is doing the doors but not if the driver is.

Conductors acting as AFC can touch the doors provided they sign the traction and route.

It's a big bloody difference between a guard standing on the platform with the same training as the AFC guard than a driver leaning out of a window on a curved platform facing away from you. You and I both know that so I fail to see what your trying to achieve here

If the conductors think that difference makes it unsafe for them do they refuse to travel on other operator's services which are DOO or DCO for safety reasons?

If the unions are saying it's unsafe for passengers shouldn't the unions be submitting evidence of why that is the case to bodies like Rail North, Transport Focus and Travel Watch who are interested in getting the best deal for passengers?

I'm not going through this with you every month, it's honestly repetitive and boring.

The DfT accountants want "DCO" as it's the next step to DOO, they've admitted this because it saves money, your fare won't go down. I'm under the impression both ASLEF and RMT wanted to sit on Rail North and the Rail Development Group but were both told to politely go away. So much for consultation!

 

[Tetchytyke]

Conductors acting as AFC don't touch the doors except in an emergency, so it seems they are happy to undertake such a role if one of their conductor colleagues is doing the doors but not if the driver is.

Eh?

If the conductors think that difference makes it unsafe for them do they refuse to travel on other operator's services which are DOO or DCO for safety reasons?

Eh?

If the unions are saying it's unsafe for passengers shouldn't the unions be submitting evidence of why that is the case to bodies like Rail North, Transport Focus and Travel Watch who are interested in getting the best deal for passengers?

 

[FordFocus]

Clutching at straws and the hope that if jcollins continuously posts quotes from the ITT Northern Tender that this "DCO" rubbish will happen.

 

[muz379]

Clutching at straws and the hope that if jcollins continuously posts quotes from the ITT Northern Tender that this "DCO" rubbish will happen.

But then he threw a massive wobble when I pointed out to him that as soon the DCO experiment is proven to not be saving enough money station facilities will be the next thing under attack . Booking office staff are expensive luxuries when you can just provide a few more TVM's and fit a remotely monitored CCTV system

 

[Moonshot]

When I was a guard I patrolled trains but never did revenue on late Friday/Saturday night trains as it was extremely problematic and hostile. It was reassuring to passengers to see someone in uniform obviously one person can't split up 10 people fighting but there was some customer service skill with the simple questions of 'how many stops until?'

The reason a lot of guards didn't patrol in my area is because of lack of PA handsets in the train with people missing their stop and blaming lack of announcements and only door controls in the rear cab. No good for stopping every 3 minutes. TOCs need to fit door controls inside the carriage whilst retaining the cab door controls for overcrowding and special working.

This is by far the best approach when working a late night train full of drunken idiots.....and to add to that , my own personal approach is to also announce manually inside the carriages which stop is next as the PA is often inaudible over the noise of a drunken rabble. Also i do wake people up in case they miss there stop. Trying to sell tickets at that time of night is a waste of time, and potentially makes you the target of an assault if someone thinks you are carrying a chunk of money.

 

[northwichcat]

The DfT accountants want "DCO" as it's the next step to DOO, they've admitted this because it saves money, your fare won't go down.

I'm not bothered about my fare going down. Although, I will be bothered if the promised improvements are cancelled or cause substantial fare rises.

I'm under the impression both ASLEF and RMT wanted to sit on Rail North and the Rail Development Group but were both told to politely go away. So much for consultation!

Rail North is a partnership between locally elected councils. If Mick Cash or Mick Whelan want a seat on Rail North then they need to be elected by the public as local Councillors first. There were local elections this year so they've had an opportunity to do that since Rail North was formed.

DfT issued a Northern Rail consultation mentioning DOO which they invited individuals and groups to respond to. It sounds like the RMT handed out postcards to it's members and 9,315 members sent one of them back, ASLEF, TSSA and RMT also submitted written responses.

I heard Govia, Abellio and Arriva all talked to the unions regarding DOO and went back to DfT and said "DOO won't work, we need another approach" so DfT came up with DCO.

 

[muz379]

I heard Govia, Abellio and Arriva all talked to the unions regarding DOO and went back to DfT and said "DOO won't work, we need another approach" so DfT came up with DCO.

From the unions point of view there is no difference between DOO and DCO . Both mean downgrading the guards role and upgrading the drivers role which is fundamentally what the unions are in opposition of

The DFT must have been mad or completely incompetent if they thought that DOO with no second man could have been implemented with the Northern franchise .

 

[northwichcat]

Clutching at straws and the hope that if jcollins continuously posts quotes from the ITT Northern Tender that this "DCO" rubbish will happen.

If someone can put a proper argument why DCO (opposed to DOO) won't work with proper impartial references and statistics I'll listen but 169 posts in to this thread no-one has done that.

The whole thread is like a party political broadcast for the TUSC opposed to a proper discussion on DOO and DCO.

Some of the recent posts are stupid

- an emoji posted in response to me saying the trade unions should provide evidence of safety claims to passenger groups to get backing if passenger safety is really a concern. Given the response I'm guessing the unions were joking when they said passenger safety is a concern and their only concern is keeping their members in highly paid roles.

- RMT and ASLEF officials being given seats on an elected body that they've not been elected to!

The DFT must have been mad or completely incompetent if they thought that DOO with no second man could have been implemented with the Northern franchise .

Ah a sensible comment. With the number of unstaffed stations having only 1 member of staff on board would probably breach the government's own Equalities Act as who would assist disabled passengers at unstaffed stations? The driver? Other passengers?

 

[FordFocus]

Rail North is a partnership between locally elected councils. If Mick Cash or Mick Whelan want a seat on Rail North then they need to be elected by the public as local Councillors first. There were local elections this year so they've had an opportunity to do that since Rail North was formed.

Apologies, I'm thinking of another group! Still the key industry one of RDG they were turned away from..

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

If someone can put a proper argument why DCO (opposed to DOO) won't work with proper impartial references and statistics I'll listen but 169 posts in to this thread no-one has done that.

The whole thread is like a party political broadcast for the TUSC opposed to a proper discussion on DOO and DCO.

Some of the recent posts are stupid

- an emoji posted in response to me saying the trade unions should provide evidence of safety claims to passenger groups to get backing if passenger safety is really a concern. Given the response I'm guessing the unions were joking when they said passenger safety is a concern and their only concern is keeping their members in highly paid roles.

- RMT and ASLEF officials being given seats on an elected body that they've not been elected to!



Ah a sensible comment. With the number of unstaffed stations having only 1 member of staff on board would probably breach the government's own Equalities Act as who would assist disabled passengers at unstaffed stations? The driver? Other passengers?

AND I once again challenge people, and you directly this time to put your opinions down in writing on here:

a) why DOO is SUCH a grand idea

b) why is is not such a good idea from the position of being a train driver

It simply amazes me, that people are STUPID enough to want to pay through the nose for a service which is less safe, than the service for which they had to pay the same eye-watering amount for, when it was safer !

 

[FordFocus]

If someone can put a proper argument why DCO (opposed to DOO) won't work with proper impartial references and statistics I'll listen but 169 posts in to this thread no-one has done that.

There are some very good points made in 169 of them posts from people who do the job whether it's a guard or driver on the huge disadvantages of drivers operating the doors under either DOO or this "DCO" some accountant has dreamed up but you've made your mind up on what you want to listen to and that's the ITT and "apparently" or "I heard" quotes that you keep posting that your taking as the gospel.

Here are some reasons on why DCO won't work in the NW

- The unions are against it. ASLEF won't accept new DOO nor will the RMT
- There is no real operational advantage of the driver operating the doors, except a possible marginal 5 second time saving at each station.
- You have to change drivers terms and conditions with a financial hit for the company through increased responsibilities. It's an increase in duties and risk
- There are more legal implications of getting the door duties wrong and you end up at the wrath of the ORR and CPS. It's safer to have a guard standing on a platform looking at the entire length of the train then a driver partially leaning out of a window.
- The infrastructure costs on new DOO installations is huge, you can't get away with a misty mirror at the end of the platform.
- Your still paying a Conductor the same money to do less work
- DCO trains can't run on their own as there are no fall back for helping the disabled at remote stations
- DMUs are unlikely to be retrofitted for DOO.
- DCO is the next step for full DOO

The whole thread is like a party political broadcast for the TUSC opposed to a proper discussion on DOO and DCO.

Right, okay :roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Oh and increase risk on stop shorts, SPADs and wrong side doors releases. Something that looks quite poor on a safety record, so why would drivers vote and agree on an increased risk?

 

[northwichcat]

- DCO trains can't run on their own as there are no fall back for helping the disabled at remote stations
...
- DCO is the next step for full DOO

Bit of a contradiction there.

 

[FordFocus]

But you've ignored all my other points? Then you complain that no one is having a debate with you about DCO.........

DCO is the next step for DOO as was pointed out by the DfT..

 

[LowLevel]

For what it's worth I always patrol my train unless I can't get down it because it's wedged, and even then I walk alongside it frequently at stations to make sure all is well. A lack of working Avantix is not an excuse not to patrol.

I've never come close to coming a cropper yet and if a riot is brewing I want to know about it well before someone pulls the passcom and I have to wade into it to get the train into a position to get help anyway.

I don't always do tickets but even then frequently I do, albeit in a more lax way than I normally might.

I've been abused and physically assaulted before, every occasion has been on a weekday daytime thus far.

While as the guard I may not generally be expected to physically intervene, I will judge every situation individually and where necessary act.

 

[muz379]

Bit of a contradiction there.

But he is right in what he is saying .

If it was not for the franchise bidders saying DOO was impossible because of the equalities act , I suspect a winning bid would have implemented full DOO , With the a similar penalty fare system and traveling revenue inspectors to metrolink in the suburban areas surrounding the major cities . And then the retention of on board ticket sellers for the less used branches .I think we would have seen some station closures too

Given this was the DFT original aim , they will still be looking towards the implementation of this at some point in the future because surely they had the aim of full DOO for very good reason ?

 

[PHILIPE]

There are so many pages to wade through now but, if it has been mentioned before excuse me, I saw a post on another Forum of great interest.
The members of the unions are responsible to their employers, TOCs or Network Rail for example. These are the bodies with which the Unions have to negotiate with but it was suggested that if the DaFT specified DOO or DCO in the Franchise Agreements then that is the a form of Contract to which the TOCs have to work to. The Unions do not negotiate with DFT as they are not their members employers, so if the TOCs have to work to the Agreement there is nothing the Unions could do about. I could be wrong, of course.