W Driver Only Operated Trains (DOO) discussion

[Jonfun]

(I must admit I'm kinda suprised all on train staff don't have that training, like Air Stewards are supposed to)

The problem revolves around safety legislation, and tasks which are defined as safety critical. If you start training all your onboard staff in coordinating an evacuation then this becomes a safety critical role and a whole world of requirements such as medical standards, ongoing assessments, competence management processes etc kick in and it becomes an impressively large undertaking.

However, I do get the impression from what's been posted here by folk from FGW that their level of training for onboard staff without direct safety responsibility is far below that of other train companies.

 

[Flamingo]

The problem revolves around safety legislation, and tasks which are defined as safety critical. If you start training all your onboard staff in coordinating an evacuation then this becomes a safety critical role and a whole world of requirements such as medical standards, ongoing assessments, competence management processes etc kick in and it becomes an impressively large undertaking.

However, I do get the impression from what's been posted here by folk from FGW that their level of training for onboard staff without direct safety responsibility is far below that of other train companies.

I'd be interested to know what training gets given to other companies. There are regular briefing days a few times a year for all on-train staff, but the CH training does revolve around following instructions from the Train Manager - who may not be there under the proposed new method of working.

 

[Jonfun]

Broadly speaking, in most situations awaiting instructions from the Train Manager will be (currently) the correct thing to do. At our place, all onboard staff get classroom training on fire procedures, including which types of extinguishers for which fire; what and where the onboard safety equipment is; what and where the passcomms and egress handles are, and how they operate; using the PA as necessary to shepherd passengers; the evacuation procedure, and how to safely assist in an evacuation; lineside hazards (eg Third Rail and OLE) and things like basic terminology and understanding lineside signs; and if there's an emergency, how to identify lineside/signal post telephones and how to communicate with the signaller. Supplemented with practical training on a heritage site throwing each other out of "smoke" filled trains, banging clips down, and a general familiarisation with how to stay safe 'on the ground'.
Usually two or three safety brief days a year to refresh and advise on newer matters like GSMR red button calls etc.
The whole idea being that if the Guard says "do x" in an emergency you'll know instantly what x is and how it's used. And if it's a dire emergency and your Driver and Guard are incapacitated, at least you've some hope of achieving something.

 

[455driver]

I can't help but feel that all of this could have been avoided if they had sat down with the unions from the outset. Surely the best way of getting your staff on side is to involve them from the outset?

Unless they are intending to do the workers out of their jobs in which case it is better to keep everything vague and subject to misinterpretation!

 

[the sniper]

Quite - unless the drivers support you all is lost. As I've said before this is key. Without it there is little future for Guards with a capital G.
The difficulty is that drivers are very well paid and there is little incentive for them to support Guards - unless they would prefer a better life! Is ASLEF listening?

I disagree that it is an issue that they are well paid, if anything I believe it to be one of the greatest source's of hope for Guards. Unlike BR days, many Drivers can afford to stick with the status quo if they don't fancy the idea of doing the doors/dealing with passengers/working trains alone with 600+ passengers. Any offer made to the Drivers would have to be a very large sum of money, taking into account their wage without these responsibilities and that they'd largely be looking at 50% tax. There'd be an expectation of a big offer, anything less and taking on the extra responsibilities wouldn't be worth it for many guys. Whether those guys would be in the majority, only time will tell... I know some Drivers who say they wouldn't vote for DOO under any circumstances. I know some who'd do it for a minimum £10k salary increase. I don't know any who'd go out of their way to help management, but I do know a good number who share a camaraderie with the Guards. But as I say, only time will tell.

To be honest, one of the saddest things I feel about the 'DOO end game' we face is that it may well be our friends and colleagues in driving grade that pull the trigger on us... If it comes to that, it'll be a hard pill to swallow. But I'm getting rather ahead of ourselves here.

 

[Dave1987]

Fully support all FGW staff striking over this. Will hopefully stop senior management from trying to set the DOO wheels in motion even if they claim it's not the case.

 

[ainsworth74]

Will it stop the DfT however?

 

[Greenback]

I understand the DfT are behind these proposals. I can only see them trying to do more of this, not less, as they try to save money.

 

[northwichcat]

Apparently when DfT originally proposed DOO in the consultation document for Northern Rail the shortlisted bidders (Abellio, Arriva and Govia) objected for two reasons:
1. They couldn't see services working with only member of staff on board when most services call at stations which aren't staffed from the first to last train.
2. An independent body warned going to full DOO could result in up to 10 days of industrial action.

In the end DfT compromised on DCO when publishing the ITT.

 

[plymothian]

I understand the DfT are behind these proposals. I can only see them trying to do more of this, not less, as they try to save money.

See the McNulty report:

6.9.1 On Train Staff.

Driver Only Operation (DOO) is a safe method of operation and improves performance, with fewer human interactions involving the door opening, door closing and dispatch procedures.

The study recommends that the default position for all services on the GB rail network should be DOO, with a second member of train crew only being provided where there is a commercial, technical or other imperative.

 

[BestWestern]

Sheer top grade spin at it's most blatant!

"Fewer human interactions" makes it safer; ah I see! Jeez think how much time the NHS will save when they send him in there he points out what an expensive waste of time it is obliging Doctors to seek agreement before declaring a patient dead on the operating table. It won't be for a while though, I think that Ryanair fella has booked him to a do POO study first!

 

[FordFocus]

There was a few people in the industry which ridiculed McNulty has failing to understand how the railway works and his methods in formulating his report.

 

[Kevin_Brum12]

From Wikipedia....

McNulty was Chief Executive and Chairman of Short Brothers plc, before its takeover by Bombardier. McNulty was President of the Society of British Aerospace Companies (1993–94) and Chairman of the Department of Trade and Industry Aviation Committee (1995–98). He then became Chairman of National Air Traffic Services (1999–01), and its successor the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) (2001–09), replaced by Dame Deirdre Hutton. His is a non-executive director of Gatwick Airport.

As a private sector contributor to public sector projects as a civil servant, he was Chairman of Ilex URC, the regeneration company for Derry, and Chair of Advantage West Midlands since 2009. Made Deputy Chairman of the Olympic Delivery Authority, he was Chairman of the Rail Value for Money Study sponsored by the Department of Transport and the Office of Rail Regulation.

Not someone who knows about the day to day operations of railways. I suspect a day or two shadowing traincrew would have been helpful, I suspect he did not bother.

Given the fact computers can screw up I would be rather worried about "reducing the human interaction" in air traffic control :roll:

 

[plymothian]

That worries not politicians.
Beeching?

 

[regulation9]

The track is the same, the routes are the same, the passengers are the same, the risks are the same. What is going to change overnight to make a Guard unnecessary?

But the track, routes and risks are the same for the Turbos already running from Paddington to Reading operated only by the Driver. How do you explain to passengers that the 20 year old train on platform 2 can take them to Reading with only a Driver but the brand new train on platform 1 can't?

The proposal to hire more staff (in what grade.) is meaningless.

I thought FGW had said 25 Train Managers and 75 Customer Hosts?

 

[Flamingo]

I

The track is the same, the routes are the same, the passengers are the same, the risks are the same. What is going to change overnight to make a Guard unnecessary?

But the track, routes and risks are the same for the Turbos already running from Paddington to Reading operated only by the Driver. How do you explain to passengers that the 20 year old train on platform 2 can take them to Reading with only a Driver but the brand new train on platform 1 can't?

The proposal to hire more staff (in what grade.) is meaningless.

I thought FGW had said 25 Train Managers and 75 Customer Hosts?

The example that the company keeps giving us is Pad to Reading. But there is NO commitment that Pad-Reading is the only track that will be run DOO. And there is no reason why any incident won't happen on a Turbo either. The 20 year-old train on the opposite platform should not be operated without a guard either, but if you are happy to travel on it, good for you.

What is your source for those figures - it's the first I have heard of them. And that number of staff would be lost in 12-18 months through natural wastage. And spread across every depot, covering the extra trains that will be running, that's probably the minimum required.

 

[bramling]

I think everybody recognises that new traction, especially as advanced as this is supposed to be, is going to require a different method of work. Hopefully easier and safer than what it's replacing. What I can't understand, and have said before, is why it is being introduced by FGW in a way that it totally antagonising the people who are going to work it, and who's support and co-operation is required to make a success of it.

The new method of working is something that should be getting worked on as a joint effort between management and staff, not the current situation where management have created huge uncertainty in staff of all grades, and only paid lip-service in answering the legitimate questions staff have about their role and job security.

One of the worst things about these situations is the uncertainty which surrounds things.

The railway has a horrible habit of slowly drip-feeding staff with rumours, everyone on the front line then hears something different. This demoralises staff even before whatever change programme has actually been officially announced. The continuing process then grids staff down over time.

Everyone accepts that change is sometimes necessary, but railway companies seem to have no idea how to smoothly implement it especially when there are ER issues involved. It doesn't help that the transient nature of today's management seems to lead to more change than is really necessary as every new manager tries to lay their scent.

If change was better managed things would be better all round, you would have a much more productive and motivated workforce across the board. I think it's fair to say most railway staff genuinely want to do their best, and many feel frustration that management often holds them back from doing that.

 

[Carlisle]

If change was better managed things would be better all round, you would have a much more productive and motivated workforce across the board. .

Some changes yes, but DOO/DCO was never going to be an easy one to introduce/extend however it was done , that's why most TOCs have steered well clear

 

[thelongestroad]

It's even worse for our colleaugues on the West fleet who know they're getting Turbos but no idea if they're going to have a job.

 

[bnm]

It's even worse for our colleaugues on the West fleet who know they're getting Turbos but no idea if they're going to have a job.

There are to be no redundancies for the life of the franchise.

 

[455driver]

There are to be no redundancies for the life of the franchise.

So that's 4 years and then they can get rid of everyone they don't want/like!

 

[Talbot]

Quite simply, if an accident or incident occurs it's the difference between having one safety trained person; the Driver, or two. Consider that the Driver is usually the first person to feel the impact in a collision; consider that the Driver has many things to attend to in the event of any emergency that don't in any way concern dealing with the passengers; consider that the Driver may be incapacitated not only through a collision and injury but also through shock or ill health.

The Great Western network has in recent history suffered some very nasty accidents. We had Southall, Ladbroke Grove and Ufton Nervet. We came very seriously close to having another one very recently, thanks to a certain heritage operator - make no mistake, in that incident the marvellous foolproof safety systems that make crashes impossible were thoroughly overidden; had that train passed the signal just minutes earlier we would have seen a major train crash. We had the shocking incident at Lavington in which a tree smashed through and demolished the cab of a speeding HST; only by sheer luck did the Driver walk away. A few weeks ago we suffered a fatality in which the victim smashed through the windscreen and impacted the cab bulkhead directly behind where the Driver's head would have been, had he not been quick enough to dive onto the floor. Transpenine Express had a Driver suffer a heart attack in the middle of nowhere (as seen on TV). Virgin recently had a Driver electrocuted by 25,000 volts of traction current..."Sh*t happens", as they say, and when it does you're a hell of a lot better off when there's decent, competent help available. Those who like to imply that the railway stopped having accidents and incidents when BR ceased to be are living in a dream world.

Put it this way - when I did my Guard training and we covered the bits about accidents and the emergency procedures concerning them, the trainer was very clear about the 'golden rule' - the procedure comes first, the passengers come last. That applies to all of us, and if the Driver doesn't make it your Guard will do the neccessary. If the Driver is still breathing and able to do his bit, you have a clued-up second person who can assist you. If you have only a Driver, whether he makes it or not he isn't going to be helping his passengers. Your friendly Ticket Examiner/customer service bod/whatever will be considerably less helpful in either case.

So, I hope that helps to clear it up for you!

Your friendly Ticket Examiner/customer service bod/whatever will be considerably less helpful in either case.
So, who are you to judge who will be helpful or less able to cope in an emergency situation, do you not think Ticket Examiners have the ability to do so ? You come across very patronising and show clearly the divide you conductors seem to have within this railway environment, dont be so smug, your job is not too far away from ours. as for DOO, it works well up here in Scotland, and thats your problem, afraid your days of sitting in back cab are about over.

 

[455driver]

Talbot,

Do you receive full training and refreshers in fire, evacuation, protection etc?

If so then you would be as much use as a guard, if jot then you wouldn't. These are the simple facts of it and I don't think BW meant any disrespect to you, your grade or any other railway workers in his post, he was just trying to keep the (already long) post as short as reasonable.

 

[Captain Chaos]

There are to be no redundancies for the life of the franchise.

Wow. Lucky us. A whole 4 years. It's like being told you've won £1m but can only receive it at £10 per week. It sounds great at first till you find out the second part...

 

[HH]

Wow. Lucky us. A whole 4 years. It's like being told you've won £1m but can only receive it at £10 per week. It sounds great at first till you find out the second part...

That's a good deal more than most people get. Most of us could be made redundant tomorrow.

 

[Flamingo]

That's a good deal more than most people get. Most of us could be made redundant tomorrow.

True. But in a lot of industries, (the NHS, Civil Service, etc) there is the expectation that redundancy is such a rare occurance that it could be discounted. The Railway (or at least parts of it) had previously come into that category.

Personally, if I'd wanted that kind of job insecurity, I'd have applied for a management position!

 

[Robertj21a]

So that's 4 years and then they can get rid of everyone they don't want/like!

That's 4 years of reassurance in my book !. How on earth can anyone look at 4-year job security as a bad thing ?

We'd all like a lifetime guarantee of job security. However, most of us live in the real world and appreciate that lengthy guarantees cannot be delivered.

 

[Hadders]

That's a good deal more than most people get. Most of us could be made redundant tomorrow.

Agreed. Times change and nothing should be set in stone. Why should any organisation commit to no changes for the working life of an individual.

In my opinion the best way to secure jobs is to have a growing industry, renowned for good value and excellent service. Not clinging to deals and agreements from way back in the past.

 

[notadriver]

Your friendly Ticket Examiner/customer service bod/whatever will be considerably less helpful in either case.

So, who are you to judge who will be helpful or less able to cope in an emergency situation, do you not think Ticket Examiners have the ability to do so ? You come across very patronising and show clearly the divide you conductors seem to have within this railway environment, dont be so smug, your job is not too far away from ours. as for DOO, it works well up here in Scotland, and thats your problem, afraid your days of sitting in back cab are about over.

Actually i think guards are perfectly placed and able to tell how TEs will cope based on their knowledge of emergency training and procedures. And it's quite slanderous to say 'your days of sitting in the back cab are over' as it implies all guards do exactly that. '

 

[thelongestroad]

I totally agree, it's not reasonable to assume that any job is immune from redundancy. It's just the mist of uncertainty hanging over certain grades which is not going to be great for morale over the coming years.

At the end of the day, I'll do any job as long as I can pay my mortgage.