DOO and early running trains

[Jamesb1974]

and to suggest that most drivers have no interest in the railway is to my mind a sad state of affairs.

It might be a sad state of affairs to your mind, but as A-Driver said, it is perfectly true. Many of the blokes that I work with really couldn't give a toss about the railway outside of work. Now if you meant that most drivers have no interest in the railway as in, they don't care about whether the job is done properly or to the best of their ability, then that is wrong.

There are a few who have an interest in railways from a hobby perspective, but for the majority it is a job that they do to pay the bills and other than a professional interest, it holds no fascination or romance. Just because it seems interesting to you as an observer doesn't mean its interesting to the people who do it for a living. That is not to say that drivers (and other railway staff) are not professionals when it comes to doing the job. It just means that when your interest is railways, their interests are something else entirely!

I'm sure most Airline pilots wouldn't choose to spend their days off hanging around at the airport watching aircraft, but it doesn't mean to say that they aren't professional in what they do during work.

 

[D1009]

Now if you meant that most drivers have no interest in the railway as in, they don't care about whether the job is done properly or to the best of their ability, then that is wrong.

That is what I did mean, and A-Driver did not specify what he meant.

 

[A-driver]

That is what I did mean, and A-Driver did not specify what he meant.

I certainly didn't mean that and thought it was obvious from the discussion.

Most drivers are not enthusiasts and have no interst in the railway other than or work. As such they would not show any interest in knowing timetables etc and so would be unlikely to know when the last train from various stations leaves.

Thought that was fairly obvious from the posts?...

 

[Antman]

I certainly didn't mean that and thought it was obvious from the discussion.

Most drivers are not enthusiasts and have no interst in the railway other than or work. As such they would not show any interest in knowing timetables etc and so would be unlikely to know when the last train from various stations leaves.

Thought that was fairly obvious from the posts?...

Well when I was on the buses I had a reasonable knowledge of bus timetables in the area I worked and I would certainly have been fully aware if I was doing the last bus on a particular route and I'd have made a point of looking out for any stragglers.

You might of course say that is slightly different as bus drivers are far more likely to be asked about timetables than train drivers.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

So if a passenger leaves themselves 10 minutes contingency (or 20, or 60) that is then used up by some other unforeseen circumstance, resulting in them arriving just on time (lets define this as meaning a few seconds before "the doors close xxx before departure") are they cutting it too fine if the train then leaves early?

Oh I am sorry, I forgot just how picky some people on this forum could be, what I meant was.....



To be completely honest, I think if a passenger misses a train by a minute or less, having decided to arrive within a minute of the scheduled departure time and/or not to allow a reasonably sufficient amount time for delay or disruption en route, particularly if they are seasoned travelers or regular commuters, then they are cutting it too fine.



I do hope I have now covered most eventualities, but if you feel there is something else I failed to account for, please hesitate to mention it.

 

[3141]

6 pages of wibble & froth. Still that's about 10' of my life I won't get back. Perhaps a moderator may consider locking this thread.

Great, H-D. Lock the thread because it contains opinions you don't like.

A Driver said yesterday, and others have since repeated, that some or many drivers aren't interested in railways as such. I don't expect them to be. But I do hope that people providing a public service would be interested in the job beyond just doing what it says on a bit of paper that tells them what diagram they're working at that moment.

On a route like the Waterloo and City Line that could be difficult. On Cross Country from Bournemouth to Birmingham there's probably much more scope for different things to crop up.

One of the features of providing a public service is when the turn you're on is the passengers' last opportunity to get home. I'd hope the driver would be aware of the consequences of leaving someone behind. No, I don't mean if the train's already moving out he should stop it if he sees someone running towards the station 200 yards away. I do mean he shouldn't leave early. What might happen in all the permutations in between those extremes will depend on the nature of the individual driver.

Probably one or two more will post on here to tell us how little they care beyond following the diagram. Somebody used the word "professional". What does that mean? I reckon it means taking a wider view than I turn up, I do what I'm told, I go home again.

Most likely there are lots of drivers who would have a greater focus on the customer than some of the posters here.

 

[Antman]

Oh I am sorry, I forgot just how picky some people on this forum could be, what I meant was.....



To be completely honest, I think if a passenger misses a train by a minute or less, having decided to arrive within a minute of the scheduled departure time and/or not to allow a reasonably sufficient amount time for delay or disruption en route, particularly if they are seasoned travelers or regular commuters, then they are cutting it too fine.



I do hope I have now covered most eventualities, but if you feel there is something else I failed to account for, please hesitate to mention it.

At the risk of repeating myself.............the passenger might be "cutting it too fine" because they have been delayed en route to the station by some unforseen incident or other...............just as the train might arrive late for the very same reason.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Great, H-D. Lock the thread because it contains opinions you don't like.

A Driver said yesterday, and others have since repeated, that some or many drivers aren't interested in railways as such. I don't expect them to be. But I do hope that people providing a public service would be interested in the job beyond just doing what it says on a bit of paper that tells them what diagram they're working at that moment.

On a route like the Waterloo and City Line that could be difficult. On Cross Country from Bournemouth to Birmingham there's probably much more scope for different things to crop up.

One of the features of providing a public service is when the turn you're on is the passengers' last opportunity to get home. I'd hope the driver would be aware of the consequences of leaving someone behind. No, I don't mean if the train's already moving out he should stop it if he sees someone running towards the station 200 yards away. I do mean he shouldn't leave early. What might happen in all the permutations in between those extremes will depend on the nature of the individual driver.

Probably one or two more will post on here to tell us how little they care beyond following the diagram. Somebody used the word "professional". What does that mean? I reckon it means taking a wider view than I turn up, I do what I'm told, I go home again.

Most likely there are lots of drivers who would have a greater focus on the customer than some of the posters here.

Yawn.

 

[ComUtoR]

A Driver said yesterday, and others have since repeated, that some or many drivers aren't interested in railways as such. I don't expect them to be. But I do hope that people providing a public service would be interested in the job beyond just doing what it says on a bit of paper that tells them what diagram they're working at that moment.

I would say that its a very relative expectation. There is a difference between caring about your job and how you do it and being a railway enthusiast. There is also a difference between enjoying your job and doing it to the best of your ability and knowing the timetable for your entire network off by heart. (you know it changes for us constantly right ?) Should I be interested in track access contracts and NR procurement strategies ?

There certainly does appear to be a misconception about how a railway employee should be especially when you consider they are no different to another employee in any other sector

One of the features of providing a public service is when the turn you're on is the passengers' last opportunity to get home. I'd hope the driver would be aware of the consequences of leaving someone behind.

More than well aware of it. Sadly we are limited by what we can and cannot do. Page after page of complaints about late running but leaving on time when its the last train means we don't care and are not passenger focused ? that is ludicrous. We also have to consider the big picture and not just a single passenger.

Somebody used the word "professional". What does that mean?

Positive attitude, good work ethic, turn up on time and be considerate to your colleagues. Or by definition. Doing something you get paid to do.

I reckon it means taking a wider view than I turn up, I do what I'm told, I go home again.

You would be surprised how often I hear exactly that. I see nothing wrong with it either. Its a job. nothing more, nothing less.

Most likely there are lots of drivers who would have a greater focus on the customer than some of the posters here.

Our job is to drive the train. I would also go so far as to say that passengers care very little for the bloke up the pointy end and think of us as overpaid monkeys. I have very little interaction with passengers and I can go weeks without speaking to any and I'm DOO ! Imagine someone who works with a guard. We can often be very invisible.

 

[Jamesb1974]

A Driver said yesterday, and others have since repeated, that some or many drivers aren't interested in railways as such. I don't expect them to be. But I do hope that people providing a public service would be interested in the job beyond just doing what it says on a bit of paper that tells them what diagram they're working at that moment.

Define "interested in the job beyond just doing what it says on a bit of paper that tells them what diagram they're working at that moment." Do you mean be professional, courteous and do the job to the best of their ability? Then that is about 95% of working people (not just train drivers).

But why constrict your comment solely to those providing a public service? The guy who cuts my hair does a top job, but he does nothing but moan about having to be at work, being self employed, having to work six days a week and being away from his family. Do I take issue with him? No. He cuts my hair. That is all I expect him to do.

When my Postie knocked on the door during the worst of the recent snows to give me a signed for parcel, did I take issue that he looked miserable, cold and clearly only had an interest in getting finished and getting warm? No, because he delivers my post and that is all I expect him to do.

I don't know what you do (did/want to do) for a living, but it might come as a shock to learn that for about 95% of the working population their professional interest ends the moment they walk out of the door. Why should train drivers be any different? Actually, I think I can partially answer that one myself. There is an expectation from certain parts of the enthusiast fraternity that because they (the enthusiast) find railways interesting and a stimulating conversation piece, that those who work on the railways must also follow suite. What is exciting and interesting to one person is dull and workaday to the next. When you've had ten hours of vibrations and going deaf on a 66 (or any other traction for that matter), the absolute last thing you want to debate is the merits or otherwise of GM's finest.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

At the risk of repeating myself.............the passenger might be "cutting it too fine" because they have been delayed en route to the station by some unforseen incident or other...............just as the train might arrive late for the very same reason.

Read it again......

 

[Bletchleyite]

To be completely honest, I think if a passenger misses a train by a minute or less, having decided to arrive within a minute of the scheduled departure time and/or not to allow a reasonably sufficient amount time for delay or disruption en route, particularly if they are seasoned travelers or regular commuters, then they are cutting it too fine.

One minute, perhaps - but I would generally expect staff not to send a train out without looking at their watch. Often this sort of early running results from leaving one station early and not checking properly along the way.

Harder for DOO (though I'd hope accurate radio-set watches are issued - indeed, perhaps time modern stock got an accurate clock in the cabs?), but on many lines the guard can see the PIS clock when dispatching. Which unless it's obviously faulty would seem the one to stick to.

Neil

 

[Class377]

Why contact TfL? Did it affect you or the OP personally? No? So reporting it is basically sticking ones nose into things that don't concern them! If anyone actually missed it then they could complain. Don't need busy bodies reporting things that they were not directly involved in...that is just trouble making and grassing people up...

If you saw a little old lady get her bag snatched by a thief, would you also ignore it and let her go and report it? Same principle...

 

[Antman]

Read it again......

Read what again?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Read what again?

He said "please hesitate to mention it" not "please don't hesitate to mention it"

Neil

 

[Antman]

If you saw a little old lady get her bag snatched by a thief, would you also ignore it and let her go and report it? Same principle...

Indeed, in any walk of life if a customer feels that the service provided doesn't meet expectations the normal practice would be to put in a complaint, otherwise nothing will change. Phrases like grassing people up really do belong in the school playground.

 

[67018]

Define "interested in the job beyond just doing what it says on a bit of paper that tells them what diagram they're working at that moment." Do you mean be professional, courteous and do the job to the best of their ability? Then that is about 95% of working people (not just train drivers).

But why constrict your comment solely to those providing a public service? The guy who cuts my hair does a top job, but he does nothing but moan about having to be at work, being self employed, having to work six days a week and being away from his family. Do I take issue with him? No. He cuts my hair. That is all I expect him to do.

When my Postie knocked on the door during the worst of the recent snows to give me a signed for parcel, did I take issue that he looked miserable, cold and clearly only had an interest in getting finished and getting warm? No, because he delivers my post and that is all I expect him to do.

I don't know what you do (did/want to do) for a living, but it might come as a shock to learn that for about 95% of the working population their professional interest ends the moment they walk out of the door. Why should train drivers be any different? Actually, I think I can partially answer that one myself. There is an expectation from certain parts of the enthusiast fraternity that because they (the enthusiast) find railways interesting and a stimulating conversation piece, that those who work on the railways must also follow suite. What is exciting and interesting to one person is dull and workaday to the next. When you've had ten hours of vibrations and going deaf on a 66 (or any other traction for that matter), the absolute last thing you want to debate is the merits or otherwise of GM's finest.

This seems be the core of the debate - about what expectations are of 'professionalism' and whether those expectations are realistic.

A professional ought to have a concern for, and commitment to, the people they are providing services to over and above 'I turn up, I do what I'm told, I go home'.

However, in my view, for a train driver that commitment manifests itself by getting the passengers to their destination safely, efficiently and as on time as possible. Not scanning the horizon with binoculars to spot any latecomers and holding everyone up (and possibly causing knock-on delays) by waiting for them.

In this case, the train in question does not seem to have run unacceptably early and even if it did, nobody would have been stranded.

Incidentally, did anyone ever answer the OP's original question? i.e. is there any evidence that DOO trains mistakenly run early more often than those with guards? I suspect not (either because there is no difference, or nobody's bothered to investigate) but would be interested to see if there are any facts out there.

 

[Antman]

This seems be the core of the debate - about what expectations are of 'professionalism' and whether those expectations are realistic.

A professional ought to have a concern for, and commitment to, the people they are providing services to over and above 'I turn up, I do what I'm told, I go home'.

However, in my view, for a train driver that commitment manifests itself by getting the passengers to their destination safely, efficiently and as on time as possible. Not scanning the horizon with binoculars to spot any latecomers and holding everyone up (and possibly causing knock-on delays) by waiting for them.

In this case, the train in question does not seem to have run unacceptably early and even if it did, nobody would have been stranded.

Incidentally, did anyone ever answer the OP's original question? i.e. is there any evidence that DOO trains mistakenly run early more often than those with guards? I suspect not (either because there is no difference, or nobody's bothered to investigate) but would be interested to see if there are any facts out there.

Unacceptably early? Surely any early running is unacceptable? And how do you know nobody would be stranded?

 

[Bletchleyite]

In this case, the train in question does not seem to have run unacceptably early and even if it did, nobody would have been stranded.

Depends on your view of unacceptably early. In my view the door close procedure should not be initiated until precisely the departure time minus precisely the advertised "doors closed" time.

Also depends why. If it was because the driver's railway-issued watch differed from the passenger's, not a lot could be done and the passenger is probably wrong. If the driver simply didn't look at his watch before departing, then to me that is unacceptable, the driver of a DOO train should always check his watch before hitting "doors close", regardless of what he thinks the timetable does. But equally it's easily forgotten - but if habit is to check, the situation would be fixed by the next station.

Incidentally, did anyone ever answer the OP's original question? i.e. is there any evidence that DOO trains mistakenly run early more often than those with guards? I suspect not (either because there is no difference, or nobody's bothered to investigate) but would be interested to see if there are any facts out there.

I genuinely don't know. If a given TOC has "doors close 40 seconds before departure" and has some DOO and some non-DOO trains, the DOO ones will probably end up with wheels turning a bit early as the departure procedure is slightly shorter, but that's not an issue. Another is that a guard can probably see the time on the PIS but the driver can't.

Neil

 

[67018]

Unacceptably early? Surely any early running is unacceptable? And how do you know nobody would be stranded?

A previous poster quoted the train as logged as running as no more than 30 seconds early throughout. Given that train doors close at least 30 seconds before booked departure time, and lack of evidence that they closed any earlier, there's no indication that anybody missed the train who should have caught it.

(I accept that, although this view is - in my opinion - the closest to a consensus there is on what should happen, consensus is decidedly lacking and there are a wide range of views from the aforementioned 'drivers with binoculars' to 'passengers should allow at least half an hour to catch their train').

As for being stranded, can you name any journey on the GOBLIN that cannot be made by alternative means after the trains stop running?

 

[Antman]

A previous poster quoted the train as logged as running as no more than 30 seconds early throughout. Given that train doors close at least 30 seconds before booked departure time, and lack of evidence that they closed any earlier, there's no indication that anybody missed the train who should have caught it.

(I accept that, although this view is - in my opinion - the closest to a consensus there is on what should happen, consensus is decidedly lacking and there are a wide range of views from the aforementioned 'drivers with binoculars' to 'passengers should allow at least half an hour to catch their train').

As for being stranded, can you name any journey on the GOBLIN that cannot be made by alternative means after the trains stop running?

Well the merits or otherwise of the 30 second rule have been done ad nauseam so there is little point going over that again.

You seem to have overlooked the fact that somebody may be wanting to go to Barking for an onward connection.

 

[67018]

Well the merits or otherwise of the 30 second rule have been done ad nauseam so there is little point going over that again.

Agreed!

You seem to have overlooked the fact that somebody may be wanting to go to Barking for an onward connection.

Anyone going for a train that connects onto another one out into the sticks really needs to get to the platform with more than 30 seconds to spare. (Having moved out of London a few years ago I speak from experience - it's a real shock to realise that all-night transport is no longer an option!)

 

[fowler9]

I think the staff on the railways do a great job but have no problem with the OP complaining. The drivers watch may have a fault, there may be a problem with the diagram he is being given, there may even be some bizarre reason that they have deliberately left slightly early which I doubt. I am a manager in a complaints department (Not railway related) and most people make it clear they are not trying to get anyone in to trouble but they think there could be an issue with the system which could do with looking at. On the rare occasions that someone has made a complaint about a member of staff it turns out that about 99.99% of the time the complaint was rather frivolous.

At the end of the day if there is a policy about how long before departure the doors shut then make it clear everywhere. Telling people they should have turned up 5 minutes before departure just to be sure is no excuse.

 

[Bletchleyite]

At the end of the day if there is a policy about how long before departure the doors shut then make it clear everywhere. Telling people they should have turned up 5 minutes before departure just to be sure is no excuse.

To be fair those policies are made reasonably clear, though making them clearer would do no harm.

Neil

 

[A-driver]

If you saw a little old lady get her bag snatched by a thief, would you also ignore it and let her go and report it? Same principle...

Indeed, in any walk of life if a customer feels that the service provided doesn't meet expectations the normal practice would be to put in a complaint, otherwise nothing will change. Phrases like grassing people up really do belong in the school playground.

Far from the same thing. If I saw someone being mugged personally then I'd report it to the police. If I read on an international forum that someone had been mugged I wouldn't report it...

And reporting not a crime isn't just grassing someone up, it's ensuring justice is done following a crime and being a good citizen.

Noticing that a train may have left early and assuming it's driver error so reporting t is no more than being a busy body...

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have mixed views here. If it's a one off error, everyone makes them. If a particular driver repeatedly runs early (I've had this with buses, and waged somewhat of a war of attrition on a disreputable small tendered operator locally in which I watched very carefully and reported every instance I saw of off-course[1] running so the Council could claw back some subsidy[2]) they do need talking to. If it was a one off error, I doubt the TOC would waste time talking to them, and would just send a generic apology.

[1] The driver concerned had a habit of running early and cutting parts of the route because "nobody wanted them" - unfortunately for him and the operator that is not how it works; if they wanted to do that it would have to be registered as an area-based demand responsive route, or drop-off only past the city centre.

[2] The offending operator later implemented GPS tracking and the problem quickly went away. Funny, that.

Neil

 

[Class377]

Far from the same thing. If I saw someone being mugged personally then I'd report it to the police. If I read on an international forum that someone had been mugged I wouldn't report it...

And reporting not a crime isn't just grassing someone up, it's ensuring justice is done following a crime and being a good citizen.

Noticing that a train may have left early and assuming it's driver error so reporting t is no more than being a busy body...

I think you're getting confused here.

The original poster on this thread DID see this incident and he reported it. He's not urging others who are reading it on here to report it!

Again, by your own logic, noticing that a mugger had mugged someone is no more than being a busy body? It seems that you have different standards and that if something happens on the railway it's nobody else's business and you're happy to anything to happen?

 

[fowler9]

To be fair those policies are made reasonably clear, though making them clearer would do no harm.

Neil

They aren't reasonably clear at my local station and it doesn't appear on the National Rail app on my phone (I think, ha ha). At Lime Street there are signs once you get through the barriers to platforms 1-6 saying doors close 40 seconds before departure. A bit late at that point if you are cutting it fine, although hopefully one mistake by a customer would prevent it happening again.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Far from the same thing. If I saw someone being mugged personally then I'd report it to the police. If I read on an international forum that someone had been mugged I wouldn't report it...

And reporting not a crime isn't just grassing someone up, it's ensuring justice is done following a crime and being a good citizen.

Noticing that a train may have left early and assuming it's driver error so reporting t is no more than being a busy body...

Who is assuming it is driver error? Maybe the driver has a faulty watch or there is another fault in the system. If no one reports it it just happens again and again.

 

[Antman]

I have mixed views here. If it's a one off error, everyone makes them. If a particular driver repeatedly runs early (I've had this with buses, and waged somewhat of a war of attrition on a disreputable small tendered operator locally in which I watched very carefully and reported every instance I saw of off-course[1] running so the Council could claw back some subsidy[2]) they do need talking to. If it was a one off error, I doubt the TOC would waste time talking to them, and would just send a generic apology.

[1] The driver concerned had a habit of running early and cutting parts of the route because "nobody wanted them" - unfortunately for him and the operator that is not how it works; if they wanted to do that it would have to be registered as an area-based demand responsive route, or drop-off only past the city centre.

[2] The offending operator later implemented GPS tracking and the problem quickly went away. Funny, that.

Neil

Very well summed up, I spent a few years on the buses and running early or missing out bits of route because "nobody ever gets on there" is totally unacceptable and the driver is likely to be subjected to disciplinary action, obviously a one off mistake is just one of those things.

I'm sure that the overwhelming majority of bus and railway staff are professional and do their job with due diligence, inevitably though there will be a small minority with a rather slap dash attitude.

I certainly wouldn't want to hear on the news that a lone female was murdered walking home because I had left ahead of the timetable, if I were doing the last bus I would be more likely to run a minute or two behind time just to be absolutely certain I left nobody behind.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

One minute, perhaps - but I would generally expect staff not to send a train out without looking at their watch. Often this sort of early running results from leaving one station early and not checking properly along the way.

Harder for DOO (though I'd hope accurate radio-set watches are issued - indeed, perhaps time modern stock got an accurate clock in the cabs?), but on many lines the guard can see the PIS clock when dispatching. Which unless it's obviously faulty would seem the one to stick to.

Neil

Who says the driver didn't check their watch? What if the station clock was wrong and the driver actually departed right time?

Read what again?

The post of mine that you quoted.... In particular the part that says:

"...having decided .... not to allow a reasonably sufficient amount time for delay or disruption en route,..."