W Driver Only Operated Trains (DOO) discussion

[Captain Chaos]

:roll:

And if the Tories decide to leave the ECHR...?

Four and a half more years of Nasty Party rule to go...

That's human rights legislation you are referring to. The ECHR is a court room.

Either way, it would still be unlawful.

 

[A-driver]

Yes I agree it's very hard for staff to sacrifice their wages that definitely won't have been easy doing that ,but some on here say the RMT will just go on calling strikes for months/years on end in this dispute until all their demands are met and If that's true I'm sure government simply won't standby and tolerate this sort of thing forever on our railways

They don't tolerate this forever-you make it sound like this is a regular occurance. Railway industrial action is incredibly rare. Jut the right wing media make it out to be common.

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

:roll:

And if the Tories decide to leave the ECHR...?

Four and a half more years of Nasty Party rule to go...

The only thing you've ever said that I agree with

 

[notadriver]

Yes I agree it's very hard for staff to sacrifice their wages that definitely won't have been easy doing that ,but some on here say the RMT will just go on calling strikes for months/years on end in this dispute until all their demands are met and If that's true I'm sure government simply won't standby and tolerate this sort of thing forever on our railways

Some on here would say sack the lot, plenty would do the job under whatever conditions for half the salary blah blah blah.

 

[Aictos]

Precisely. "Doors in an emergency" is an absolute nonsense and a very poor attempt at trying to convince the RMT that the Guards' grade is not about to be obliterated. It failed, of course.

My point exactly and why I have nothing but the fullest support for my fellow railway colleagues who are taking action against this.

 

[Wolfie]

Any new legislation that the government decides may be necessary to bring a halt to whatever stalemate exists at the time. Drivers are, I assume, unlikely to be willing to break any new law that had to be introduced ?

In a total stalemate situation, where there is significant disruption caused to key transport facilities, I would expect any government to - eventually - be forced to take action to resolve it, however unpalatable that may be to either/both/all parties involved.

Does the phrase "Tolpuddle martyrs" have any meaning to you?

Unjust, unfair laws brought in by a massively partial Govt which has been bought and paid for by the City and their brother members of the wealthy who fund "the workers party" - hahahaha , Cameron must think Goebbels is alive and kicking - frankly deserve to be to be defied.

At least Maggie was bright enough to protect police numbers when she hacked civil rights to pieces. "Call-me Dave" is so dim he isn't even doing that! Perhaps his police guards should be withdrawn so he can find out what the public really think of him...

I fully accept that it's very unlikely to happen but, with respect, I certainly haven't 'missed the point'.

If new legislation made certain areas of public transport into 'essential services' where strikes, or similar disruptive action, was outlawed then the train drivers in dispute would be up against the law, not FGW. I doubt that many drivers would want to risk a criminal record, so would (albeit very reluctantly) take the trains out after all.

Although I've agreed that it's very unlikely to happen, it is still a possibility if the dispute remained in stalemate - presumably, you are just assuming that FGW will back down (and leave the issue for the next franchise holder) ?.

I was tempted to say "you are Boris and I claim my £5..."!

Seriously, you must be stark staring mad if you believe that the European Court of Human Rights will allow any such thing to happen.

As for Cameron's so-called UK Bill of Rights it is a complete legal farce as was clearly stated by his own past Attorney General. Thankfully the more thinking members amongst Tory MPs have already threatened a rebellion should Cameron attempt to bring this forward - that together with opposition across the piece from other parties is why the whole subject went very very quiet...

 

[Robertj21a]

But this is where a strong union where people stand together (like in Aslef) will help. They can legislate as much as they like but if the entire workforce with union backing refuse to accept it then there is little that will happen. The courts are never going to prosecute all 2000 (or how ever many FGW employ) drivers. And if they target only a few then the strikes will be extended. As I say, if you sack the entire workforce you have at least 18months with no train drivers and no train service. That's never going to be an option.

The Tory proposals may affect board unions like RMT and unite but not a strong specialist union like ASLEF.

You would never get 'the entire workforce' to be willing to break the (new) law, a good many would realise the futility of it. To believe otherwise would suggest that unions are heading back in time to the Scargill era, where he seemed to believe that unions were more powerful than the government.

 

[notadriver]

You would never get 'the entire workforce' to be willing to break the (new) law, a good many would realise the futility of it. To believe otherwise would suggest that unions are heading back in time to the Scargill era, where he seemed to believe that unions were more powerful than the government.

I don't understand the point you ads making as at the moment a new law is a hypothetical situation ? Perhaps you are saying that all train crews should be sacked and new staff employed in half the salary ?

 

[NSEFAN]

You would never get 'the entire workforce' to be willing to break the (new) law, a good many would realise the futility of it. To believe otherwise would suggest that unions are heading back in time to the Scargill era, where he seemed to believe that unions were more powerful than the government.

Well, they were stronger than the government. That's why the government eventually became stronger and took actions to weaken the unions, rightly or wrongly.

That said, a mass walk-out is still physically possible and would still have just as disruptive effect. We're not quite at the stage of threatening people to work at gun-point. Without unions in every big industry to organise general strikes they are unlikely to happen, however. Some would say that the drive for individualism has been a form of divide and conquer, and if that's the case then it has surely worked.

 

[Robertj21a]

I don't understand the point you ads making as at the moment a new law is a hypothetical situation ? Perhaps you are saying that all train crews should be sacked and new staff employed in half the salary ?

Well, as I've never said (or even thought) that, perhaps you should have read my earlier comments.

 

[ComUtoR]

You would never get 'the entire workforce' to be willing to break the (new) law, a good many would realise the futility of it. To believe otherwise would suggest that unions are heading back in time to the Scargill era, where he seemed to believe that unions were more powerful than the government.

People power has been and always will be more powerful than the government. The government exists on the will of the people.

Labour is heavily funded by the unions : http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/27/labour-funding-hit-change-political-levy-bill

A similar reform, in the 1927 Trade Union Act, resulted in a fall in the number of political levy payers from 3.5million to 2million, and a drop in party income of 20%. Between May 2010 and December 2014, Labour received donations of £48.6m from trade unions, nearly half the £110m that the party took during that period, which illustrates how important the union movement remains to Labour’s electoral machine.

Uk lobbyists : http://news.cbi.org.uk/

The CBI is the UK's premier business lobbying organisation, providing a voice for employers at a national and international level

...the CBI is a confederation of 140 trade associations, alongside larger and medium-sized businesses who tend to join the CBI directly. Together our 190,000 members employ nearly 7 million people, about one third of the private sector-employed workforce...

Remember that political party who betrayed the students over university fees ? Neither do I...

Oh and remember when there was a mass revolt over a certain tax ?

The unions power may be waning somewhat but nothing galvanizes people more than a government going to far. It takes time to push through new legislation and is certainly not done on a whim. If you really believe that such anti employment legislation would make it through parliament then you are sorely mistaken.

 

[Robertj21a]

People power has been and always will be more powerful than the government. The government exists on the will of the people.


The unions power may be waning somewhat but nothing galvanizes people more than a government going to far. It takes time to push through new legislation and is certainly not done on a whim. If you really believe that such anti employment legislation would make it through parliament then you are sorely mistaken.

Please don't try to put words into my mouth. I've never said anything about 'anti employment legislation'.

My point was that a government may, eventually and reluctantly, be forced to consider treating certain transport operations as 'essential services' if management and staff cannot move forward.

Rather than keep arguing words and trying to suggest that I'm saying things that I haven't, why doesn't anybody on here come up with what they consider will be the most likely solution. All I keep reading is that the unions will 'win' - they might have done if Bob Crow had still been around but now........???

 

[Don King]

Which are all that GWR can give. How can a company which may not be running the trains beyond mid 2019 offer promises and assurances beyond that date?

If the RMT belligerents really are pushing for promises and assurances beyond then, then they really are clueless and on a hiding to nothing.

I am getting quite sick of you banging on about "RMT belligerants" like a spoilt toddler / clueless Daily Mail reader.

Have you ever held down a job dispatching a train, as a guard or as a driver with CRIMINAL LIABILITY if you cock it up? The James Street incident has set the legal president - 5 years in prison if you cock up such duties. The judge clearly also stated that the guard had no malicious intent.

Can you care to explain to me, what I do on a 260 metre long train when there is some drunken idiot leaning on the side, who I have no direct communication with, using a CCTV monitor 260m away in a segregated cab (the IEP cabs look very similar to HST cabs with no side windows - certainly not the unit style with door controls at the cab door panel).

I would either have to make a judgement call as to whether to move off (like McGee and possibly end up in prison). Or alternatively I have to contact the signaller, secure the cab, walk back, berate Mr stupid, end up being called every name under the sun, return back to the cab 260m down the platform, restart the dispatch, only for him to repeat the action.... and so on.

A guard meanwhile can warn the passenger, remain at that location, shut the doors, keep the local door open and shout more warnings if need be, close the local door and keep a direct eye on that person, and give one on the bell / drop the tap as needed.

As opposed to me now thoroughly insensed from dealing with some prat having to stare at monitors, thus distracted from signals, p-way blokes and whatever, as the train moves off, being far more concerned that I am at risk of spending 5 years in prison due to some idiot on the platform, than what's going on in front of me.

Why would I want to accept this method of working, because a few monkeys in suits declare it "safe" to satisfy their bank balances, or do what the clueless and incompetent Rail Minister Claire Perry (previously a multinational banker), tells them?

How about these people listened to drivers, guards and platform staff who do the job every day, know exactly what the minority of passengers who misbehave can be like, and who know the legal consequences of what happens when they make mistakes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Oh for what it's worth, my issue us with the driver operating the doors and monitors causing a distraction, if they are still proposing the DOO with a competent guard then no it doesnt address my concerns.

Basically who has criminal liability for dispatch. If it's the driver, then it is DOO. End of.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As opposed to me now thoroughly insensed from dealing with some prat

Why be incensed by idiots? If you need to delay the train for safety reasons, delay it.

(Not an argument in favour of DOO, just an argument in favour of your good mental health!)

 

[ComUtoR]

Why be incensed by idiots?

I've been doing this for some time now and I still find it hard not to let it get to me. Some days are incredibly frustrating. I had a train failure a few days ago and had to detrain. Everyone was really quite reasonable and understanding.

Today I was +8 and was sworn at.

 

[Don King]

Why be incensed by idiots? If you need to delay the train for safety reasons, delay it.

(Not an argument in favour of DOO, just an argument in favour of your good mental health!)

I'm in full agreement about delaying a service for such reasons.

But putting more responsibility on the driver will not improve his mental health!

 

[bnm]

I am getting quite sick of you banging on about "RMT belligerants" like a spoilt toddler / clueless Daily Mail reader.

How many toddlers know the meaning of the word belligerent? :roll:

Had a chat with RMT members on picket last weekend. 'Belligerent' described their attitude perfectly. Also chatted with a GWR TM yesterday who was very unhappy with his union and being pressured by union reps not to work last weekend.

Only read the Daily Mail when at Mumsy's. Papers of choice are the Guardian and Independent.

So if you want to make another personal insult (why do so many of the pro strike supporters on this thread feel the need to resort to personal jibes?) try 'clueless leftie'.

 

[FordFocus]

'A Safety competent guard on every train - our current proposals maintain a safety competent guard on every Super Express Train and every Turbo cascaded to the West. This means that these trains will NOT be Driver Only Operated. All Train Managers and Conductors will be required to maintain the same competencies as today, including operation of the doors in an emergency.'

This is what I don't get from FGW management........ :roll::roll:

Previously they said the train can run DOO during disruption to pick up a guard en-route, since then I presume this has been dropped as a concession to the RMT? Let's assume it is for a minute for the sake of debate....

Train Managers and Conductors will still be required to maintain the same competencies and will operate doors in an 'emergency', again with FGW and their very broad statements I assume this is DOO in cab equipment failure.

So FGW are going to still have the exact same door training now, same wages, same conditions, same job description (with the exception of doing doors at every station) for Train Managers? ...

So what do FGW actually gain from this? They've forced the unions hands at striking, they've lost revenue, lost passenger trust as they can't guarantee a decent service for passengers west of Didcot and they've hit employee morale.

I just don't get it. CD/RA at stations or a guard giving two on the buzzer is the same timings on paper for dwell times.

The only reason I can fathom for all this dispute is that someone at the DfT want to gain a few Tory points for 'beating the RMT' and someone in FGW management wants to stick this "victory" on their CV to brown nose their way up into a directorship.

The people that suffer from this are the staff at losing wages with a bit of abuse from passengers and the fare paying passengers, some of which are posting in this exact thread whilst trying to defend FGW.

Barmy.

 

[A-driver]

You would never get 'the entire workforce' to be willing to break the (new) law, a good many would realise the futility of it. To believe otherwise would suggest that unions are heading back in time to the Scargill era, where he seemed to believe that unions were more powerful than the government.

Wouldn't you? And why would it be futile? If the entire workforce did it then it would force the employer and government to listen. If enough took part then there would be no change of prosecution. What would be gained from the company or government sacking them or prosecuting? They can rub their hands together and celebrate their victory over the evil unions and then realise that they now need to cancel every single train over the next 18-24 months and spend millions of pounds recruiting and training new staff.

One thing the driving grade is famous for is sticking tigger which is why ASLEF commonly get 80+% turnouts and an even stronger yes vote.

 

[Aictos]

This is what I don't get from FGW management........ :roll::roll:

Previously they said the train can run DOO during disruption to pick up a guard en-route, since then I presume this has been dropped as a concession to the RMT? Let's assume it is for a minute for the sake of debate....

Train Managers and Conductors will still be required to maintain the same competencies and will operate doors in an 'emergency', again with FGW and their very broad statements I assume this is DOO in cab equipment failure.

So FGW are going to still have the exact same door training now, same wages, same conditions, same job description (with the exception of doing doors at every station) for Train Managers? ...

So what do FGW actually gain from this? They've forced the unions hands at striking, they've lost revenue, lost passenger trust as they can't guarantee a decent service for passengers west of Didcot and they've hit employee morale.

I just don't get it. CD/RA at stations or a guard giving two on the buzzer is the same timings on paper for dwell times.

The only reason I can fathom for all this dispute is that someone at the DfT want to gain a few Tory points for 'beating the RMT' and someone in FGW management wants to stick this "victory" on their CV to brown nose their way up into a directorship.

The people that suffer from this are the staff at losing wages with a bit of abuse from passengers and the fare paying passengers, some of which are posting in this exact thread whilst trying to defend FGW.

Barmy.

Same here, it doesn't make sense what FGW and DfT are trying to do because it's like they're trying to wreck employee and passenger relations in short making the franchise a poison one for whoever takes over from them.

Another thing is what makes the average GWML passenger different to the average ECML passenger, if the ECML can have buffet cars then why can't the GWML have this?

The other thing as well, what happens when the train has a DOO equipment fault and there isn't a spare guard that can join the service at a station along the route "to operate the doors in a emergency" which no doubt will happen, why not just admit they were wrong and man the IEPs like they do with the HSTs and then get on with improving relations with employees and passengers which are at a all time low which is the fault of FGW management and DfT, no one else.

 

[Robertj21a]

Wouldn't you? And why would it be futile? If the entire workforce did it then it would force the employer and government to listen. If enough took part then there would be no change of prosecution. What would be gained from the company or government sacking them or prosecuting? They can rub their hands together and celebrate their victory over the evil unions and then realise that they now need to cancel every single train over the next 18-24 months and spend millions of pounds recruiting and training new staff.

One thing the driving grade is famous for is sticking tigger which is why ASLEF commonly get 80+% turnouts and an even stronger yes vote.

It seems that you just like going around in circles. I've already given my point of view and all you've done is largely repeat what you said before.

It's no wonder that unions make little progress in any negotiations if your approach is typical. Take off the blinkers, do a bit of thinking 'outside the box' - and don't just assume that union ranting will win the day.

 

[Minilad]

It seems that you just like going around in circles. I've already given my point of view and all you've done is largely repeat what you said before.

It's no wonder that unions make little progress in any negotiations if your approach is typical. Take off the blinkers, do a bit of thinking 'outside the box' - and don't just assume that union ranting will win the day.

Pretty much what all the main protagonists in this thread have done since it started. Has anyone had their opinion changed by anything said in this thread up to yet

 

[regulation9]

So what do FGW actually gain from this? They've forced the unions hands at striking, they've lost revenue, lost passenger trust as they can't guarantee a decent service for passengers west of Didcot and they've hit employee morale.

I just don't get it. CD/RA at stations or a guard giving two on the buzzer is the same timings on paper for dwell times.

Barmy.

I would suggest that there are reasons for doing this. Many of the people on this forum will disagree with the individual items on this list either on the basis of their view of the facts or because of their heartfelt beliefs about how the railway should operate. However, it is quite possible to create an argument for doing things differently.

1) The train is designed with cameras in the driving cab. Some people will think this was done just to undermine certain grades, but others will argue that this is an attempt to provide technology to help the dispatch process. It makes dispatch on curved platforms easier. It gives a better view of the doors than looking from 5 coaches away on a dark rainy evening. LUL use it and it works for them. Javelins have it and it works for Southeastern. You can't say it does not work.

2) The Driver closing the doors is faster. Not by much, but it is faster. Basically you save the time it takes for the Guard to re-board the train, close the local door and send and receive 2 from the Driver. Watch the final stage of a Voyager dispatch and compare it with a train operated by a Driver. It's probably not enough to change journey times but it might help right time running.

3) Reducing the number of staff needed to operate a train and increasing the number devoted to customer service is a good thing. Again people may disagree or see conspiracy here, but any good business would try to increase the resource it puts into the activities that add value. If you see the railway as a customer focussed business you would probably want to do this. There is another way of looking at this. If the only train you ever saw in your life was a train operated only by a Driver (commuters from Paisley to Glasgow Central or Ebsfleet to St Pancras for example) would you invent the role of the Guard to close the doors?

As I say, you may disagree with all this, but it is possible to make an alternative argument.

 

[ainsworth74]

Pretty much what all the main protagonists in this thread have done since it started. Has anyone had their opinion changed by anything said in this thread up to yet

I have actually. I have never felt that true DOO where the driver is the only member of staff on the train is acceptable (certainly from my viewpoint as a passenger) but I was fairly open to the driver doing the doors and dispatch as long as there was another member of train crew on-board (basically the Scotrai system around Glasgow). However, as this has gone on, I'm now fairly firmly of the opinion that a guard should be responsible for closing doors/dispatch on long distance services (such as those that IEP will be used on) and be fully safety critical/trained (with a PTS and all that jazz).

I still think the Scotrail style of DOO has merits but only on suburban operations (for example the current Turbo routes on the Thames Valley) but long distance stuff should stay basically as it is currently and I now firmly hold that belief.

However, I think I'm probably in a minority of people that have changed their mind!

 

[ComUtoR]

1) Javelins have it and it works for Southeastern. You can't say it does not work.

Javelins have on board managers.

465's / 376's / 319's and 375's do not have cameras. Our DOO services run using platform monitors. We do have a tiny amount of 377's which do have cameras.

We are not the standard for on board cameras by any degree. Using us is a poor example.

 

[455driver]

The driver closing the doors is not faster, the guard using their whistle is far quicker than letting the passenger's stroll along without a care in the world causing the train to get later and later.

If this pathetic/idealistic method of working gets in (I hope and pray it doesn't) I can see the train sitting at the platform (with the doors closed) until the platform is clear or the train will creep out very slowly until clear. I certainly won't be gunning it out of platforms!

The other alternative is explaining to the Judge why you (the driver) felt the need to set off from a packed platform knowing there was a chance of somebody falling between the train and platform!

It is us that will be stood there not you keyboard warriors!

 

[ComUtoR]

However, I think I'm probably in a minority of people that have changed their mind!

I would like my mind changed. I run DOO services and run with a Guard. I would like to have someone convince me that removing the Guard has any real benefit to the passenger. I would also like to see where this goes with FGW specifically as the strikes are about so much more than just DOO. I also need some confidence in ASLEF and they are yet to enter the foray. Their history with DOO and its implementation isn't, in my mind, pleasant. I need my faith in the union restored.

 

[Aictos]

1) The train is designed with cameras in the driving cab. Some people will think this was done just to undermine certain grades, but others will argue that this is an attempt to provide technology to help the dispatch process. It makes dispatch on curved platforms easier. It gives a better view of the doors than looking from 5 coaches away on a dark rainy evening. LUL use it and it works for them. Javelins have it and it works for Southeastern. You can't say it does not work.

I disagree, you have a 5 coach or 10 coach train and you see some drunk mucking around with the doors not only do you have to secure the cab as drivers have already explained but you have to go back, make sure they're in a place of safety then restart the process and hope for the best.

These cameras aren't as perfect as you make them out to be.

2) The Driver closing the doors is faster. Not by much, but it is faster. Basically you save the time it takes for the Guard to re-board the train, close the local door and send and receive 2 from the Driver. Watch the final stage of a Voyager dispatch and compare it with a train operated by a Driver. It's probably not enough to change journey times but it might help right time running.

Again I have to disagree here because you get some train crew who when it's time to go, are very quick then you get some who are not as quick.

So the argument that DOO is faster then having a guard being responsible for the doors is a load of rubbish.

3) Reducing the number of staff needed to operate a train and increasing the number devoted to customer service is a good thing. Again people may disagree or see conspiracy here, but any good business would try to increase the resource it puts into the activities that add value. If you see the railway as a customer focussed business you would probably want to do this. There is another way of looking at this. If the only train you ever saw in your life was a train operated only by a Driver (commuters from Paisley to Glasgow Central or Ebsfleet to St Pancras for example) would you invent the role of the Guard to close the doors?.

Again I disagree with this, more staff being visible for customer service is a good idea but the Stratclyde model is NOT a fit for all the routes across the UK.

Plus the unions are NOT trying to invent a role :roll: Just trying to point out the flaws in the FGW/DfT proposals which are obvious to all but the ones supporting them.

 

[ComUtoR]

If the only train you ever saw in your life was a train operated only by a Driver

If you saw that train crowded with 400+ people on a snowy winters evening. Would you still get on it ?

If you were a lone female at 0130 in the morning and the train was half empty would you still get on it ? What if it had a small group of hoodies with alcopops listening to loud music ?

 

[Don King]

How many toddlers know the meaning of the word belligerent? :roll:

Had a chat with RMT members on picket last weekend. 'Belligerent' described their attitude perfectly. Also chatted with a GWR TM yesterday who was very unhappy with his union and being pressured by union reps not to work last weekend.

Only read the Daily Mail when at Mumsy's. Papers of choice are the Guardian and Independent.

So if you want to make another personal insult (why do so many of the pro strike supporters on this thread feel the need to resort to personal jibes?) try 'clueless leftie'.

'Belligerent' is a personal insult to RMT members. You keep personally insulting them, so don't be surprised you get it thrown back at you - many men and women who have many years of experience in the guard's grades, many having held down other jobs on the platforms previously, many having worked a huge variety of traction including pre CDL slam door stock, HSTs, loco hauled stock, 80's sprinters, turbos and many who have worked freight and parcels in years gone by. This is their bread and butter, and they damn well know through experience what is the safest method of work, not some idiots in an office or former multinational bankers, now government ministers.

I note you have not bothered to respond to anything else I put as regarding why in cab CCTV is less safe than having a guard in charge of dispatch, why should drivers should take on liability for passengers 260m away from them in a segregated cab, when a guard out on the platform, in the most suitable viewing location, with the ability to view from 360 degrees, rather than a fixed camera position. is much safer. I have driven DOO and driven with a guard. I know what it is safer.

As for being a "leftie", I'll say at least the proper left sympathise with the strikers, rather than the strike breakers.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The driver closing the doors is not faster, the guard using their whistle is far quicker than letting the passenger's stroll along without a care in the world causing the train to get later and later.

If this pathetic/idealistic method of working gets in (I hope and pray it doesn't) I can see the train sitting at the platform (with the doors closed) until the platform is clear or the train will creep out very slowly until clear. I certainly won't be gunning it out of platforms!

The other alternative is explaining to the Judge why you (the driver) felt the need to set off from a packed platform knowing there was a chance of somebody falling between the train and platform!

It is us that will be stood there not you keyboard warriors!

Well said mate.