RMT settle dispute with Greater Anglia

[LowLevel]

The doors are only a part of the debate - so far to date except for on HS1 South Eastern services the moves to DOO have resulted in the staff being stripped of all operational authority, training and responsibilities.

Consequently the OBS staff have no authority to require the driver to stop the train for any reason as a guard does, no route knowledge to respond to operational or medical issues and so on.

As a guard I can't adequately put into words how disinterested I am in effectively becoming a passenger checking tickets on my own train.

Even if you take the doors away I wish to remain in charge of the train when on board it and know I have the authority to make decisions effectively.

 

[BestWestern]

I can see the logic in that, a Guard is busy with a passenger who is very unwell the driver stops the train and releases the doors to allow medical staff to assist. Alternatively there is a fire in a carriage meaning that a lot of people move to the carriage that the guard is in, as the guard investigates they then get blocked (or at least partly blocked) from accessing the door controls, but the driver could release the doors as soon as the train stops to let people off the burning train as fast as possible.

As such there could be logic that having DOO equipment is a safety benefit and the resistance of the spread of the fitting of equipment (but not the regular use thereof) is potentially putting passengers and staff at greater risk than not having it.

There is no logic in that at all, just a world of opportunity for penny pinching TOCs and their government masters.

The ill passenger scenario is a frequent event, I've never heard of it causing access issues for medical staff. A Guard is not a paramedic and is very highly unlikely to be single handedly administering critical life or death treatment such they they cannot leave to operate a door. In most situations the care of the casualty is delegated "Is there a doctor, nurse or trained medical professional on board?" to enable the Guard to deal with the 'railway' side of things. As for a fire, there is no need for anybody to be releasing doors, the passengers will be hanging off the emergency egress handles in no time.

 

[Bookd]

The doors are only a part of the debate - so far to date except for on HS1 South Eastern services the moves to DOO have resulted in the staff being stripped of all operational authority, training and responsibilities.

Consequently the OBS staff have no authority to require the driver to stop the train for any reason as a guard does, no route knowledge to respond to operational or medical issues and so on.

As a guard I can't adequately put into words how disinterested I am in effectively becoming a passenger checking tickets on my own train.

Even if you take the doors away I wish to remain in charge of the train when on board it and know I have the authority to make decisions effectively.

Surely not your own train, but the railway company's train?
If you still have a job, and are being paid it is up to them how it works, or you could leave (as I did in a previous career when the job had changed but not to my liking).

 

[Bletchleyite]

A Guard is not a paramedic and is very highly unlikely to be single handedly administering critical life or death treatment such they they cannot leave to operate a door.

Mostly not even a First Aider. FWIW I believe this should be a legal requirement as I believe it is for airline cabin crew.

 

[swt class 450]

Our train companies are just becoming a joke. AGA should just keep things exactly as they are right now with their new Stadler Flirt trains so that the Guard has full control over both opening and closing the doors and despatching the train. This would avoid any strike action and keep the train safe. This method has worked well so there is no need to change it.

The only reason i can think of is because maybe Guards wont even be guaranteed any more once the new trains enter service. Perhaps AGA want a GTR style DOO operation so that the train can still run if the OBS (On Board Sometimes) is unavailable.

I cant think of why else AGA are being so quiet and vague about this.

I am not saying i support this but i am wondering if the UK (possibly on the new AGA Stadler Flirt trains) could ever possibly use the system that is in place on almost all trains in Poland / Czech Republic / Slovakia / Hungary etc. In these countries the train arrives at the station and the Driver opens the doors and the Guard steps on to the platform. Then when the train is ready to leave the Guard blows a whistle and waves a green flag (which the Driver sees by either leaning out of the window or viewing CCTV screens) and then immediately goes back in to the train. The Driver then shuts the doors and departs. So the Guard has no control over opening and closing the doors but still has the job of despatching the train (but it is the Drivers job to check that the train is fully platformed when arriving and all the doors are safely shut when departing).

Anyway i really hope AGA get some common sense and keep Guards jobs exactly the same as they are now. I fully support the RMT Union with this.

 

[Carlisle]

Because leaving it until they announce their plans rather late in the day, if they exist, means any opportunity to take action is somewhat limited?

Not necessarily, last years Scotrail DOO ballot/dispute didn't take place until the company's plans were formally announced and the RMT still won up there .

 

[The Ham]

There is no logic in that at all, just a world of opportunity for penny pinching TOCs and their government masters.

The ill passenger scenario is a frequent event, I've never heard of it causing access issues for medical staff. A Guard is not a paramedic and is very highly unlikely to be single handedly administering critical life or death treatment such they they cannot leave to operate a door. In most situations the care of the casualty is delegated "Is there a doctor, nurse or trained medical professional on board?" to enable the Guard to deal with the 'railway' side of things. As for a fire, there is no need for anybody to be releasing doors, the passengers will be hanging off the emergency egress handles in no time.

Right, so passenger safety is the reason for not extending DOO and the RMT are willing to strike over just having the equipment on trains even though there's no announcement on it being used. Yet for something that happens all the time (ill passengers) they are happy with that and don't argue that they should have basic first aid training to help keep passengers safe.

It is only penny pinching if there is a reduction in staff and/or their duties. If the equipment is fitted (at a cost) and never used for services which are currently not run as DOO then how is that penny pinching?

The problem is that is by balloting to Strike on the chance that DOO may be used on services that are getting new trains where the equipment is specified but is not planned to be used then it makes it easy for the press to make out that the RMT are bad.

If strikes do happen because of that then the public will be more willing to support the government in making it harder for people on the railways to strike. If that happens then DOO could be forced through as strikes may not be able to happen when they could be possible under current rules.

It boils down to the boy who cried wolf, say the same thing over and over when there is no risk of it happening (i.e. say that the wolf/DOO is coming) and people will stop believing that it will happen and so the boy/RMT get taken out by the wolf/DOO when it does happen.

Anyway, what do the train drivers say, are they balloting on strike action? Why not, do they not object to the increase of DOO? No, rather they know that calling a strike every 5 minutes is going to harm then more in the long term.

 

[jayah]

All this arguing over who operates the doors. I can remember a time when it was the [l]passengers [/l]who did that, and without asking for any renumeration for doing so.

Passengers have never been *responsible* for closing doors.

 

[LowLevel]

Surely not your own train, but the railway company's train?
If you still have a job, and are being paid it is up to them how it works, or you could leave (as I did in a previous career when the job had changed but not to my liking).

At the moment no, it is my train - I am the company servant in charge of the train.

I consider it something very much worth fighting for.

I could write a reasonable book of my experiences and life as a guard. I have no wish for it to be cut short. I see what I do each day.

I will cheerfully leave, if something as fulfilling and able to see me out in my present circumstances with the qualifications they require of me is available.

If however I lose everything then all I can say is I won't take it lightly.

 

[jon0844]

The trains themselves might do, but there is absolutely no way that we'll have the signalling to deal with that in 10 years time.

That wasn't the point. It was that if trains are built that could be retrofitted with tech to drive automatically, would the unions get upset and demand assurances that within their 30-50 year lifespan, such tech wouldn't be added/enabled?

 

[BestWestern]

That wasn't the point. It was that if trains are built that could be retrofitted with tech to drive automatically, would the unions get upset and demand assurances that within their 30-50 year lifespan, such tech wouldn't be added/enabled?

If the government had already started a war against the Drivers and made clear it wished to get rid of them, then yes I expect they very probably would. As with so many anti-RMT posts, you are disregarding the reality of what is already happening on the network, and what has already been quite clearly stated as policy by those responsible for shaping the future of it. The RMT has every right to be forward-thinking and take early steps to identify where the future battles lie.

 

[The Ham]

If the government had already started a war against the Drivers and made clear it wished to get rid of them, then yes I expect they very probably would. As with so many anti-RMT posts, you are disregarding the reality of what is already happening on the network, and what has already been quite clearly stated as policy by those responsible for shaping the future of it. The RMT has every right to be forward-thinking and take early steps to identify where the future battles lie.

Just as long as the RMT don't strike their way out of existence and in doing so lose the war.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am not saying i support this but i am wondering if the UK (possibly on the new AGA Stadler Flirt trains) could ever possibly use the system that is in place on almost all trains in Poland / Czech Republic / Slovakia / Hungary etc. In these countries the train arrives at the station and the Driver opens the doors and the Guard steps on to the platform. Then when the train is ready to leave the Guard blows a whistle and waves a green flag (which the Driver sees by either leaning out of the window or viewing CCTV screens) and then immediately goes back in to the train. The Driver then shuts the doors and departs. So the Guard has no control over opening and closing the doors but still has the job of despatching the train (but it is the Drivers job to check that the train is fully platformed when arriving and all the doors are safely shut when departing).

That's an interesting option. The closest you get to that in the UK is the Voyager, where the driver releases, and the guard gives the driver the signal to close doors via the buzzer (1-2 - corrected), though the guard does the final check rather than the driver.

Personally I favour driver release, guard close. It seems to offer the best of both worlds - faster release with the guard able to continue revenue duties until time for departure, safer closing and dispatch. In many ways closer to how it worked before doors were automated. It's also in common use already.

By the way it's only MUs that use this method of dispatch. On LHCS with "UIC" type doors, they release automatically when the train drops below 5km/h, and closing is done by the guard using a UIC key (sort of a reverse T key), then the handles lock automatically when the train goes over 5km/h again. Some countries have modified their stock to keep the closure pressure on until released by the driver, though, Germany is one such country.

 

[jon0844]

If the government had already started a war against the Drivers and made clear it wished to get rid of them, then yes I expect they very probably would. As with so many anti-RMT posts, you are disregarding the reality of what is already happening on the network, and what has already been quite clearly stated as policy by those responsible for shaping the future of it. The RMT has every right to be forward-thinking and take early steps to identify where the future battles lie.

But the reality is that in the not too distant future, big train makers will be building trains that could be, or will be, driverless in some markets.

As such, the unions have every right to be concerned that a TOC buys a train that is capable. It may come without the tech activated, but what about 10-20 years down the line?

I expect that if a future Government decides driverless trains are the way ahead, it will seek to introduce it 'on the quiet' to begin with.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I expect that if a future Government decides driverless trains are the way ahead, it will seek to introduce it 'on the quiet' to begin with.

I personally think that "no guards" is a bit of a blip. I would expect "guard-only operation" to be the norm on long-distance trains within say 30 years, DLR style. It's really the driver grade that's under long term threat.

 

[Dave1987]

I personally think that "no guards" is a bit of a blip. I would expect "guard-only operation" to be the norm on long-distance trains within say 30 years, DLR style. It's really the driver grade that's under long term threat.

I really don't think you know what you are on about, and neither does jon0844

 

[grumblingalong]

I really don't think you know what you are on about, and neither does jon0844

Nope I agree with bletchleyite as well, especially when the bean counters realise what drivers cost. One person on board in a mainline version of the DLR. I reckon I'll see it before it retire.

 

[Dave1987]

Nope I agree with bletchleyite as well, especially when the bean counters realise what drivers cost. One person on board in a mainline version of the DLR. I reckon I'll see it before it retire.

I don't. This has been done to death before.

 

[SPADTrap]

Nope I agree with bletchleyite as well, especially when the bean counters realise what drivers cost. One person on board in a mainline version of the DLR. I reckon I'll see it before it retire.

You drive/tailgun semaphore lines, come on

Semaphores! And you think they'll get up to speed with a mainline style DLR? I can't see it

 

[BestWestern]

But the reality is that in the not too distant future, big train makers will be building trains that could be, or will be, driverless in some markets.

I expect that if a future Government decides driverless trains are the way ahead, it will seek to introduce it 'on the quiet' to begin with.

"On the quiet"? As in, introduce driverless trains without train drivers noticing? Possibly not gonna work...

Driverless on the mainline is generations away. The technology isn't good enough, the money isn't there, and there is nowhere near enough short-term benefit for any government on a five year election cycle to want to stomach the disastrous disruption that it would take to get it in place. It isn't gonna happen. Really, it isn't.

 

[jon0844]

"On the quiet"? As in, introduce driverless trains without train drivers noticing? Possibly not gonna work...

Driverless on the mainline is generations away. The technology isn't good enough, the money isn't there, and there is nowhere near enough short-term benefit for any government on a five year election cycle to want to stomach the disastrous disruption that it would take to get it in place. It isn't gonna happen. Really, it isn't.

If a train is built that could be retrofitted, likewise any new signalling projects, you could make it so implementing would be relatively quick and easy (not cheap, sure).

I do feel that any Government wishing to introduce it will have to find ways to do it gradually.

Trains that can drive themselves don't automatically mean the driver goes. I agree that will take many years and probably not in my lifetime, but it we are to believe a car can drive itself in a much more dangerous environment, and we'll get over the issue of how a car decides who to sacrifice if a collision is inevitable, then I am sure new legislation will be passed to change the way things work on the railway.

It may well be that we'll start with new lines, and of course initially it will start small. But does anyone think it won't happen ever?

Unions will need to be watching closely in the future, and especially looking at contracts new drivers sign up to in the years ahead that may state that the skills required could be reduced, and with less money as a result.

I happen to think the prospect of keeping a guard and not the driver could also become a reality...

(Apologies for this now going off on a tangent.. maybe best kept for another thread).

 

[Bletchleyite]

I really don't think you know what you are on about, and neither does jon0844

Anyone who thinks trains will not be automated within 30 years is, in my view, either a Luddite or has their head in a bucket of sand.

The concepts already exist and work. It's a hugely easier thing to take those concepts to the mainline than to cars and buses, and within 30 years I'd expect all road vehicles to be automated, too.

What if the unions don't like it? Tough, as they'll just make all the staff redundant. No striking possible then, as no staff needed.

Harsh, but it is how it will be, you may as well get ready for it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It may well be that we'll start with new lines

I think there is a very high chance that HS2 will be automated when on the dedicated line, if not initially then soon after that.

It'll go from there.

 

[rd749249]

I think there is a very high chance that HS2 will be automated when on the dedicated line, if not initially then soon after that.

It'll go from there.

Even sooner than that, turns from Abbey Wood to Paddington will be driverless. The models are there but as previously said, getting all legacy infrastructure to switch will take a lifetime, and certainly not in my driving career.

 

[bramling]

Anyone who thinks trains will not be automated within 30 years is, in my view, either a Luddite or has their head in a bucket of sand.

The concepts already exist and work. It's a hugely easier thing to take those concepts to the mainline than to cars and buses, and within 30 years I'd expect all road vehicles to be automated, too.

What if the unions don't like it? Tough, as they'll just make all the staff redundant. No striking possible then, as no staff needed.

Harsh, but it is how it will be, you may as well get ready for it.

The concept does not already exist and work. Britain does not have an automated main-line ATO system. It has taken over half a century for LU to just get to the point where four out of ten lines have it. The latest two lines to go over to ATO have actually seen things go backwards in terms of open-air performance compared to manual driving - only acceptable because the overall benefits are worthwhile in the context of a metro application.

If we accept that a train is unlikely to go down below less than one person in charge of it, which I think is pretty much a given, the benefits of abolishing the driver just don't stack up.

I expect there to be more metro application of ATO in 30 years, although even then I think people may be surprised how little compared to today.

I'm not saying it can't be done on the mainline, but I am rather less convinced that it can be done in a way where the benefits make it worthwhile.

 

[grumblingalong]

You drive/tailgun semaphore lines, come on

Semaphores! And you think they'll get up to speed with a mainline style DLR? I can't see it

C'mon semaphores into binary for a computer to read would be easy It may be worth mentioning I have a good few years before I go begging to the railway pension and I think Brentwood is more likely to see it than Berney Arms

 

[jon0844]

I'm not saying it can't be done on the mainline, but I am rather less convinced that it can be done in a way where the benefits make it worthwhile.

I don't think the driver would go completely. What happens when there's a computer fault? The train just sits there until someone comes out and rescues it?

(Between now and then, imagine how much more computer hacking and security issues there will be to contend with, as an aside).

However, a driver may be hands-off most of the time. S/he may be paid less as a result, and training will be far shorter - making it easier to replace a driver, and thus giving drivers less bargaining powers.

Planes can fly without pilots, but I doubt they will for the simple fact that passengers want someone there to take over when things go wrong EVEN IF stats suggest human factors might be less safe.

I'd still want a real person to try and save the plane if the computer gives up.

On a train, you'd most likely just stop, but if you're trying to keep to time then you need staff.

 

[Dave1987]

Anyone who thinks trains will not be automated within 30 years is, in my view, either a Luddite or has their head in a bucket of sand.

The concepts already exist and work. It's a hugely easier thing to take those concepts to the mainline than to cars and buses, and within 30 years I'd expect all road vehicles to be automated, too.

What if the unions don't like it? Tough, as they'll just make all the staff redundant. No striking possible then, as no staff needed.

Harsh, but it is how it will be, you may as well get ready for it.

Like I said I don't think you really understand what you are on about. But this has been done to death in other threads.

 

[gallafent]

[…]Driverless on the mainline is generations away.

No, it really isn't. Years, certainly, of course. Decades, maybe (probably). Generations? No way.

This does of course depend on what one means by “driverless”. I would think UTO might even be generations away. Humans are social animals, after all, and appreciate a representative of the operator being on board to provide a natural human interface between the operator and the passenger (or to provide a target to berate when things out of its control go wrong .

I would be very surprised if full ATO, though, with a single train manager on board (as per DLR), perhaps dealing with door closure and despatch (or even perhaps not, computer vision and other sensor fusion really is getting rather good these days, and would be expected to surpass human capabilities fairly soon if not already, given appropriate sensing input), perhaps just dealing with customer queries and ticketing, is not the norm by 2050, probably sooner.

http://uic.org/com/uic-e-news/555/article/france-what-do-we-mean-by-self-driving-trains?page=iframe_enews

“The first experiments will start in 2019 with a remote-controlled freight train.”

“In 2023, the first semi-automated TGVs will run on dedicated tracks to improve the frequency of train services. In particular, these will increase the number of trains on the Paris-Lyon line by 25%.”

Far from a generation away. As Bletchelyite (I think it was) suggests, most likely first deployment in the UK will be on HS2 (apart of course from the xrail turnback stuff and perhaps other isolated experiments), with subsequent extensions into the legacy network.

There's no timescale for full ATO on the mainline given for the French experiments, but they clearly plan to be quite a lot of the way there (“In 2022, the extension of the RER E, Eole, to the west of Paris will be put into service and will be semi-automated between Nanterre and Rosa-Parks (19th arrondissement of Paris).”) within well under a decade.

In other words, it's already here in the pure research phase, soon to enter applied research and development phase.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Like I said I don't think you really understand what you are on about. But this has been done to death in other threads.

I disagree, and I think *you* take a very Luddite line which is putting your head in the sand.

Mark my words, within 30 years there will be at least some driverless trains (guard-only operation) on the mainline. I still predict it'll be HS2 on the dedicated stretches to start with - no level crossings, one set of rolling stock so PEDs feasible etc (hence no need to be looking out for people on the track) - it could be done now, as it has been on the DLR for years. Automating HS2 on the LGV is just like a faster DLR, that's all. It is not a difficult proposition at all.