Should we have DOO?

[Beveridges]

The people driving the trains be getting paid more as they are taking on more responsibility , the dispatchers dispatching the trains will want more and the number of stations that need dispatchers will increase

Won't DOO get rid of Despatchers as well ? I have never even seen any despatchers whenever I've travelled on DOO services in the South.
(Not that I have travelled much in that area admittedly)

Is that RPI's on every train?

1 RPI per train is still far cheaper than a guard and if an RPI is not available the train does not have to be cancelled. Thus any staff shortages of RPI's won't hit the company anywhere near as hard as staff shortages with Guards.

 

[GatwickDepress]

I've seen staff with LED batons dispatch DOO trains at the busier stations: Clapham Junction, East Croydon, Bedford, Brighton, London Bridge. I'm unsure at "lesser" stations such as Three Bridges, Haywards Heath, etc.

I suspect at the likes of Brighton, they also have an important role in making sure passengers don't attempt to board as the train's just about to pull out. All too common at Brighton.

I don't work in the industry, so I can't say with any certainty though.

 

[Carlisle]

Won't DOO get rid of Despatchers as well ? I have never even seen any despatchers whenever I've travelled on DOO services in the South.
.

Probably dispatchers using CD /RA indicators or battons at larger stations and Bodyside cameras linked to DOO in cab CCTV for smaller stations

 

[LowLevel]

Can't this thread be put to death? It has just entered a circle of repeating what was said 10 pages ago - ie people saying 'I think that but I don't actually know'.

The question of 'is a ticket examiner significantly cheaper than a guard' has been debunked already by those of us with access to every TOCs pay agreement. Wade in if you wish.

Yes there are dispatchers at DOO stations all over the network, that is why they have their dispatch method in the rulebook. Not all stations certainly but quite a few. I think the only exception is London Overground where they only get dispatched from Euston but even then they still have dispatchers on some of their stations for Southern services.

 

[muz379]

Won't DOO get rid of Despatchers as well ? I have never even seen any despatchers whenever I've travelled on DOO services in the South.
(Not that I have travelled much in that area admittedly)



1 RPI per train is still far cheaper than a guard and if an RPI is not available the train does not have to be cancelled. Thus any staff shortages of RPI's won't hit the company anywhere near as hard as staff shortages with Guards.

If you have to have a dispatcher with a guard controlling the dispatch who can get a good view that everything on the platform is safe before giving the RTS to the driver why would you not need a dispatcher with only a driver
Think about stations like Deansgate where there is a wicked curve , currently there are no dispatchers here , either the driver would have to get out of their cab to get a view of the train before closing the doors , or A dispatcher would have to be provided . In terms of reducing these dwell times a dispatcher would be the best option , especially for a station that is part of the bottleneck into Piccadilly .

As for the cost of having 1 RPI still cheaper than a guard , The RPI might be cheaper but the driver will be more expensive . Say you take £5k off the guards salary , Now say ASLEF fight for their members to get a £5k pay increase . How is that traincrew arrangement going to be cheaper , unless some trains run without a RPI , as soon as the public start getting wise to this they will chance buying a ticket more and more .

 

[Mintona]

You work the Javelins? Are you sure about the scope of the OBM's role? Are they PTS trained? Can they leave the train to assist with protection of the line if needed?

O L Leigh

Hi. Bit late to this discussion I know, but as I used to be an OBM I can probably help with this discussion more than most.

When I started I had a full colour blind, hearing etc medical, and I also received PTS training in Ashford sidings, including protection of the line. My licence said I held PTS competence on all AC and DC electric lines, with the exception of HS1 as it's got a whole different set of regulations not applicable to normal lines. Although we were also all fully trained on how to evacuate in the London tunnels, and how the procedures would be carried out if necessary. I also received full training on penalty fares and MG11s etc, so whilst we didn't do door duties we did everything else a normal guard would do.

No 395 is allowed to operate in passenger service without an OBM, be it on the mainline or HS1.

However, I do believe that since I left, the requirement to hold PTS and pass the medical has been dropped, in favour of more customer service duties, which is a bit of a shame. There still won't be any trains operating without an OBM though, they are too important in case of London tunnel evacuation.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Won't DOO get rid of Despatchers as well ? I have never even seen any despatchers whenever I've travelled on DOO services in the South.
(Not that I have travelled much in that area admittedly)

There are dispatchers at Bromley South, Victoria, Orpington, Sevenoaks, Charing Cross, London Bridge, Waterloo East and Cannon Street on my old patch. I may have forgotten a couple too.

 

[Aictos]

Regards to rolling out of DOO, every route is different with stations needing different requirements to be DOO operated, for example with Huntingdon 12 car DOO services; Platform 3 is straight and has DOO video monitors so drivers can self dispatch BUT Platform 2 has a slight curve and there is no DOO video monitors provided so dispatchers HAVE to be provided as it's a safety requirement.

As much as I am not a fan of DOO, where it has been introduced the powers to be take many things into account such as traction used, routes, stations, safety requirements etc...

More DOO operation doesn't mean the end of dispatchers in fact because my TOC has introduced MORE 12 car services since the start of the current franchise they have recruited MORE dispatchers.

 

[w0033944]

Might I take this opportunity to apologise?

Occasionally, I experience a period of guilt at my centre-left political views. I'm always reminded of the quote falsely attributed to Churchill, but actually from a French Revolutionary-era politician that effectively says that anyone who isn't a liberal/socialist at 20 has no heart, but, if they haven't become a conservative by the age of 30 they have no brain. Last night, I was struggling a bit with this and tried to argue myself into adopting the right-of-centre viewpoint in this debate.

 

[Fincra5]

Seems to be one of these threads every other day now... Whether you want to bash the guard or support the role. People say about 'cost savings', do these every benefit the passenger? I think not. Might deepen a shareholders pocket... for example has the North London Line seen a drop in ticket prices? :roll:

 

[muz379]

Seems to be one of these threads every other day now... Whether you want to bash the guard or support the role. People say about 'cost savings', do these every benefit the passenger? I think not. Might deepen a shareholders pocket... for example has the North London Line seen a drop in ticket prices? :roll:

big IF but if they do happen
They dont deepen the shareholders profit , they reduce the subsidy the DFT pays to the TOC which reduces the burden on the taxpayer for keeping the railway working

 

[Class377/5]

Don't forget that Thameslink has dispatchers at Bedford, Luton, Luton Airport Parkway*, St Albans, St Pancras#, Farringdon#, City Thameslink and Blackfriars.

* for HSTs only IIRC
# for use in event DOO cameras fail

Plus dispatchers are used for engineering work, for example Streatham can see FCC staff when services terminate there. The role of the dispatcher is getting more important with increasing passenger numbers, the Tube uses them in peak.

 

[Fincra5]

big IF but if they do happen
They dont deepen the shareholders profit , they reduce the subsidy the DFT pays to the TOC which reduces the burden on the taxpayer for keeping the railway working

Ok, but say it was done on some Northern lines, without millions spent for new stock... you'd millions to install monitors/ mirrors etc for DOO operation. Thus the saving isn't as much as seems... then you'd still pay and RPO or TI.

 

[Clip]

Seems to be one of these threads every other day now... Whether you want to bash the guard or support the role. People say about 'cost savings', do these every benefit the passenger? I think not. Might deepen a shareholders pocket... for example has the North London Line seen a drop in ticket prices? :roll:

Why would it see a drop in ticket prices when it is priced by and is part of Tfl pricing which is zonal?

There was no mention of it being done to reduce ticket prices either when they got rid of the guards on there so your post is irrelevant.

 

[muz379]

Ok, but say it was done on some Northern lines, without millions spent for new stock... you'd millions to install monitors/ mirrors etc for DOO operation. Thus the saving isn't as much as seems... then you'd still pay and RPO or TI.

I agree that it is highly unlikely to save any money . I was just pointing out that the intention behind the move doesnt do anything to give shareholders more profit it is merely an attempt to reduce government subsidy .

There was no mention of it being done to reduce ticket prices either when they got rid of the guards on there so your post is irrelevant.

The DFT isnt saying that it is planning it to reduce ticket pricing . But they arent going to go out of their way to dispel this myth either are they

 

[HSTEd]

Since all London Overground stations are manned regardless, why would you pay an RPI in that case? Surely you would just go to fully barriered operation.

 

[ToastLaser]

Bit late to this thread, however might be able to provide a bit of input .. I worked as a guard for both arriva and transpennine over 10 years. I always kept a note of my takings for commission purposes but it also brings up an interesting point. Every year I took roughly 10k more in revenue than I got paid as my yearly salary. So the other aspects of the job could be argued came for free! such as dealing with incidents (have been on board when train is involved in a fatality) , dealing with unruly passengers, safe dispatch and anyone who's been on an airport train when it's been heavily delayed will know how crazy people can act when they think they might miss flights . Anyone who criticizes the role of the guard should try it out for a while. Sometimes it might look easy, but when you have vunerable passengers stuck in disruption that's when we really earned our keep. I just find it sad that reading this forum some people seem happy that railstaff May lose their jobs. How is that progress? In my opinion the railways should be about transporting people from a to b safely, not just about making as much money as humanly possible.

 

[Moonshot]

Bit late to this thread, however might be able to provide a bit of input .. I worked as a guard for both arriva and transpennine over 10 years. I always kept a note of my takings for commission purposes but it also brings up an interesting point. Every year I took roughly 10k more in revenue than I got paid as my yearly salary. So the other aspects of the job could be argued came for free! such as dealing with incidents (have been on board when train is involved in a fatality) , dealing with unruly passengers, safe dispatch and anyone who's been on an airport train when it's been heavily delayed will know how crazy people can act when they think they might miss flights . Anyone who criticizes the role of the guard should try it out for a while. Sometimes it might look easy, but when you have vunerable passengers stuck in disruption that's when we really earned our keep. I just find it sad that reading this forum some people seem happy that railstaff May lose their jobs. How is that progress? In my opinion the railways should be about transporting people from a to b safely, not just about making as much money as humanly possible.

Yeah but how much of the revenue you took onboard were actually passengers who would have been forced to pay at destination anyway?

No matter which way you look at the whole picture, the current role of the guard will change significantly in the future.....such processes as detonator protection will simply cease to exist.

Despite all the comments in this thread, its intersting to note that guards are still being taken on at TOCs in the North. Clearly the role in its current form still has a lot of life left in it...

 

[Tomnick]

I can't see detonator protection ceasing to exist for a long time yet. It might become irrelevant as far as emergency protection is concerned, but it's still an important part of possession and some line blockage arrangements and, of more relevance, assistance protection. The Guard might not have to carry out the latter, but who looks after the passengers for the half an hour or more that the Driver's away from the train?

 

[Anvil1984]

Despite all the comments in this thread, its intersting to note that guards are still being taken on at TOCs in the North. Clearly the role in its current form still has a lot of life left in it...

A bit of a naive comment. Conductors are required by those franchises up until the new franchise in 2016. They cant just not recruit otherwise services in the next 2 years would be canceled and fine incurred

 

[Moonshot]

A bit of a naive comment. Conductors are required by those franchises up until the new franchise in 2016. They cant just not recruit otherwise services in the next 2 years would be canceled and fine incurred

Naive? I m simply stating a fact.....and any changes in the guards role will require some investment in infrastructure to make DOO happen. Which imo is way off....

 

[hidden]

IF it happens, it would be many many years from now and I feel, as a new guard getting to grips with the industry, service standards would drop without one.

 

[Moonshot]

IF it happens, it would be many many years from now and I feel, as a new guard getting to grips with the industry, service standards would drop without one.

That would really depend on what " service standards " are required in the future......certainly service standards should be underpinned with a robust passnengers charter for starters.....and if those standards require a staff member on board other than the driver, then great.

 

[muz379]

Since all London Overground stations are manned regardless, why would you pay an RPI in that case? Surely you would just go to fully barriered operation.

London overground operates a very neat suburban metro type service with only 84 stations , Northern calls at 529 stations some suburban some fully rural . Some of these stations dont have the footfall necessary for barriers to pay for themselves , but putting barriers up to replace staff on the train would only work if they did it at every station for revenue purposes and to allow access and egress from the train for DDA requirements .

 

[Bald Rick]

Bit late to this thread, however might be able to provide a bit of input .. I worked as a guard for both arriva and transpennine over 10 years. I always kept a note of my takings for commission purposes but it also brings up an interesting point. Every year I took roughly 10k more in revenue than I got paid as my yearly salary. So the other aspects of the job could be argued came for free! such as dealing with incidents (have been on board when train is involved in a fatality) , dealing with unruly passengers, safe dispatch and anyone who's been on an airport train when it's been heavily delayed will know how crazy people can act when they think they might miss flights . Anyone who criticizes the role of the guard should try it out for a while. Sometimes it might look easy, but when you have vunerable passengers stuck in disruption that's when we really earned our keep.

I promised myself I wouldn't add to this thread, and I have really really tried. But...

With the exception of dispatch, you don't need a guard for any of the above. It could all be done by someone on board with appropriate customer service training, but, crucially, without the competencies and training required for guards duties.

There needs to be a very clear distinction between Driver Only Operation, with the emphasis on the final word, and having a visible member of staff on board every train looking after the interests of passengers. You can have both.

 

[notadriver]

A guard takes charge of unusual situations and helps the driver. I bet ticket examiners and RPIs don't do that.

 

[Bald Rick]

A guard takes charge of unusual situations and helps the driver. I bet ticket examiners and RPIs don't do that.

No reason they couldn't though. I've done it, and I'm none of the above!

 

[Captain Chaos]

No reason they couldn't though. I've done it, and I'm none of the above!

But there is no onus on them to do so. So they don't have to. Why do more than what you are contractually obliged to do? If you want on board staff other than the driver to get involved in helping the driver with safety related tasks then they will need a safety critical work card. If it ain't broke, by fix it?

I have consistently brought in 4 times my gross pay (including overtime and extras) year on year. Why are my services no longer needed on board? Our passengers actively seek us sometimes. I think they'd miss us. As a service requirement it seems quite clear to me the passengers do want us present. It's government that wants shot of us. There is no other country in the world I can think of where they are so he'll bent on getting rid of on board personnel. I don't think even the TOC's truly want it.

Face to face communication is so much better in terms of customer service. DOO is bad if it doesn't retain someone else on board. That's the problem. The ideal is only a driver. It's crap. Ask anyone travelling late in the evening on a Bedwyn to Padd or Maidenhead to Padd stopper. DOO can only work if a second person, who is correctly trained, is retained. Otherwise it's pointless.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yeah but how much of the revenue you took onboard were actually passengers who would have been forced to pay at destination anyway?

No matter which way you look at the whole picture, the current role of the guard will change significantly in the future.....such processes as detonator protection will simply cease to exist.

Your first point about revenue is irrelevant really. It's not to do with being forced to buy at destination. It's about service standards. If I don't sell tickets on say a peak Redhill stopper to Reading then the queue will have about 50 or 60 people in it (in addition to those from our DOO services). Might have to queue for 20 minutes or so. It's not just about how much we take and to where, but the quality abd level of service this provides.

Your second point, as a Guard I concur with. I have already asked this question myself. They will go eventually. The role IS changing. We must be proactive about it and ask ourselves what we can do to show our value. I believe we do still have a role to play. What role is a different matter....

 

[muz379]

Your first point about revenue is irrelevant really. It's not to do with being forced to buy at destination. It's about service standards. If I don't sell tickets on say a peak Redhill stopper to Reading then the queue will have about 50 or 60 people in it (in addition to those from our DOO services). Might have to queue for 20 minutes or so. It's not just about how much we take and to where, but the quality abd level of service this provides.

Anybody that has seen the queue over the footbridge at leeds in the morning peak will testify to this .

 

[PermitToTravel]

But there is no onus on them to do so. So they don't have to. Why do more than what you are contractually obliged to do?

Many people on these forums state that they illicitly travel for free because they will help out if necessary. Does the answer involve DOO with increased travel rights for RPIs / on train staff?

 

[Moonshot]

But there is no onus on them to do so. So they don't have to. Why do more than what you are contractually obliged to do? If you want on board staff other than the driver to get involved in helping the driver with safety related tasks then they will need a safety critical work card. If it ain't broke, by fix it?

I have consistently brought in 4 times my gross pay (including overtime and extras) year on year. Why are my services no longer needed on board? Our passengers actively seek us sometimes. I think they'd miss us. As a service requirement it seems quite clear to me the passengers do want us present. It's government that wants shot of us. There is no other country in the world I can think of where they are so he'll bent on getting rid of on board personnel. I don't think even the TOC's truly want it.

Face to face communication is so much better in terms of customer service. DOO is bad if it doesn't retain someone else on board. That's the problem. The ideal is only a driver. It's crap. Ask anyone travelling late in the evening on a Bedwyn to Padd or Maidenhead to Padd stopper. DOO can only work if a second person, who is correctly trained, is retained. Otherwise it's pointless.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Your first point about revenue is irrelevant really. It's not to do with being forced to buy at destination. It's about service standards. If I don't sell tickets on say a peak Redhill stopper to Reading then the queue will have about 50 or 60 people in it (in addition to those from our DOO services). Might have to queue for 20 minutes or so. It's not just about how much we take and to where, but the quality abd level of service this provides.

Your second point, as a Guard I concur with. I have already asked this question myself. They will go eventually. The role IS changing. We must be proactive about it and ask ourselves what we can do to show our value. I believe we do still have a role to play. What role is a different matter....

Ok I ll slightly re phrase that......how much of the revenue collected by that particular guard would not have found its way to the tills IF he hadnt carried out revenue duties on the train. I agree about the bit re queues.....and of course a conductor can help reduce those queues provided he or she does revenue duties.