Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[387star]

Deleted

 

[Phil.]

So last night we went to No 30 James St, Liverpool and caught the 23.09 to Lime St and then the 23.38 to Piccadilly.

James St of course has a special relevance doesn't it. There were half a dozen people including events management agency people carefully sending down one lift at a time to restrict numbers on platforms. We had to queue for quite a while watching the well disciplined denizens of Liverpool "complying" with staff instructions and pushing in left right and centre.

As we were on a Loop platform we didn't see the Wirral platform - but from the number of people pushing in, drunk, refusing to listen to orders, etc, etc, it would have been interesting to see how some of these desk jockeys would have regarded the situation in real life.

Then we got to Lime St! There was an initial queue but it soon descended into an unruly drunk melee around the barrier with those who were sober enough to queue challenging the latecomers, while staff were notable by their absence and the police kept a distant watch but did nothing to keep order.

When a five car set arrived at P 8 a mad rush ensued and it was every man - or woman - for themselves. Eventually, wedged to the doors, we departed. Sure enough team rivalry broke out and fight started between rugby league fans of Warrington and Widnes. Friends tried to keep the two hotheads apart and reduce it to rival singing but at Widnes both parties decamped and a full scale battle started on the dark and unstaffed platform. No police had travelled on the train so anything could have happened, and from the bang on the bodywork as one of them went down next to where I was sitting I am glad I don't have his head today.

One man operation - safe - As if!!!!

It isn't - it never will be, and only desk bound button pushers would ever suggest it is.

I live in the real world, call it out for what it is, and wonder why, last night, I left the car in Manchester and used public transport! No-one who didn't have to would do it by choice!

A Guard on the train wouldn't have made the slightest difference. I have experience of dealing with rugby fans at Twickenham and football fans at Selhurst. What you've described is par for the course post match.

 

[highdyke]

So, a route you're aware of around 60 miles with simbids meaning no AWS but you say everywhere barring some obscure place is fitted with AWS and TPWS?

Sorry didn't say that. I said it's near universal these days with some exceptions. They are: low-speed station areas like Chester, Carlisle, Edinburgh Waverley, Birmingham New Steet etc. SIMBIDS- cheapo reversible not used in normal practice, but used to get around engineering work, failures etc is another. Many freight lines.

The point I was making in the past even on main lines you had no such system. Sure the GWR were keen with ATC (a contact system) on most main lines, and other railways had trials. But whole lines, even in the 80s didn't have AWS, really that's what I was getting at.

BR started fitting it after the Harrow and Lewisham crashes and it's based on the system design by Alfred Hudd, with the addition of the visual warning.

BR had trials of a better system seen here 45 mins through: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s9Ey5VLJr4

The point is the driver's lot has been improved. It can be improved still with ERTMS (used on the Cambrian and on trial on the Hertford Loop and Thameslink core).

Grantshouse - been a few years since I signed there but guess you're talking about the collapsed tunnel at Penmanshiel. You can clearly see the entrance on the south side when you pass.

Correct, the ECML realigned by McAlpine when they were rebuilding the A1. The bodies of the workmen trapped after the tunnel collapse are still in the tunnels.

 

[BestWestern]

A Guard on the train wouldn't have made the slightest difference. I have experience of dealing with rugby fans at Twickenham and football fans at Selhurst. What you've described is par for the course post match.

There is a lot to be said for simply maintaining a decent awareness of what is happening on board, taking the appropriate action and making the relevant calls in a timely manner when it is helpful, rather after the **** has hit the fan and the problems are much bigger.

As ever, the value of a decent Guard has many, many faces.

 

[TBirdFrank]

A guard or OBS can at least see what is happening and request assistance.

Properly managed police and security staff could ride later evening trains and provide some sort of cover - I do not expect uniformed grades to put themselves at risk - but even less do I expect a driver, all on his own, to be able to see what is going on adequately, or to be able to do his job properly and try to manage this sort of thing too.

You are quite right - it is par for the course - but so is the corporate and policing blind eye turned to it.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

Merseytravel has ordered the trains for Merseyrail to operate.
Merseytravel is the local publicly owned PTE which is chaired by local council people.
Despite being mostly left-leaning councils, they have decided to make the new fleet DOO (with employment safeguards for displaced staff).

So this is not a DfT/Union, private/public, left/right, intransigent TOC/profit thing at all.
It's a cash-strapped PTE making a logical decision about operating a new train fleet.
Quote by Liam Robinson, Chair of Merseytravel (who has a rail background and is a TSSA member): http://www.merseytravel.gov.uk/abou...ter-City-Region-leaders-give-green-light.aspx

presumably based o nthe experience of the other PTEs (none TFL) light rail / metro/ highly segregated tram operations

 

[O L Leigh]

Back to DOO, aslef's mistake was whenever they agreed to it in any form in the first place. If it's not safe then all DOO must stop now. Kicking off about extending it to 12 cars is political, whatever Mr Whelan may say. Sadly, I believe this will be the reason Southern will eventually "win".

Anyone believing that this dispute is political, no matter what the President of the RMT may or may not have said, is deluding themselves. This dispute is primarily about safety, and even Southern's attempts at manipulating public opinion by taking out full-page press advertisements in order to try and reduce the dispute to prosaic levels does not disguise this fact.

But keeping to the thrust of this topic...

You cannot really compare the agreements of the past with the issues of today. Yes ASLEF did eventually cave in and allow DOO when BR waved a big enough carrot under it's nose, but at that time DOO was being sold on the basis of the safeguards provided by the door interlock circuit. The thinking back in the early 1980s, a time where there were few if any 12 car trains, was that if you got door interlock you were safe to depart, therefore you didn't really need to worry too much about checking back along the train.

But times have moved on. Since those times the safety culture on the railway has burgeoned and emphasis has been placed more and more on operational incidents and how to reduce them. From the 1990s onwards this was all focused on SPADs leading to the introduction of TPWS and OTMR, amongst other mitigations. In more recent times the focus has shifted to the "Platform/Train Interface". Several incidents have highlighted the weakness of BR's original confidence in the traction interlock circuit. More scrutiny has been placed on safe despatch and watching trains clear of the platform to ensure no-one is at risk from injury or death.

And this is where all the arguments in favour of DOO fall down. Where is it you expect a driver to be looking? While CCTV DOO despatch might be the best option from the many alternatives available, the fact of the matter remains that a driver cannot (and should not) be expected to have to juggle so many different tasks at the same time. While the Electrostar fleet switch off the CCTV system at speeds about 10mph(?), I have it on good authority that the system used on the Hitachi IEP fleet will remain live until the train has cleared the platform end. At complex locations such as London termini and other major stations such as Bristol Temple Meads a driver will have his/her hands full with controlling the train speed and observing the signalling. Watching the monitors to ensure that no-one has fallen under the train as it pulls out (it has happened on several occasions) at the same time is simply asking for trouble. Any driver unlucky enough to be caught speeding, committing a SPAD in the station throat or suffering a "one under" while pulling out is going to be in for an uncomfortable time. Therefore drivers are obviously and justifiably concerned about the introduction of DOO. This isn't just a reductive hankering after archaic and outmoded working practices. This is an attempt to bring DOO into a very different set of circumstances to those in existence 30 years ago when it was first introduced; circumstances that do not really bare comparison. I should perhaps also note at this point that there have been no other attempts at comparable large-scale introductions of DOO in the last 3 decades.

But to answer your point directly, as an ASLEF member I can categorically tell you that no amount of money would secure my agreement to any extension of DOO operation. Safety is not something that the industry should be able to buy, and that's a message I'm taking to all the other ASLEF members I meet. I've worked DOO in the past and I can tell you that I'm glad I don't do it any more. Looking back I can identify times when I could very easily have suffered a career-ending incident and only failed to do so because of luck.

As for what else I think about DOO, well my thoughts are already a matter of record. You can go back through the search facility and read what I think if you so wish.

O L Leigh

 

[devinier]

Ok then, I predict aslef achieve something important to them out of this dispute - max 32hr week, Sunday's inside, subsequently more driver jobs etc. Saying the agreements of 30 years ago aren't relevant today is a dangerous route for them to take, as I'm sure the company would love to review a lot more of those agreements...
Of course doo isn't as safe as guard, and no I wouldn't want to work it any more than I wouldn't want drive a bus and sell tickets, or go to a fight as a single crewed police officer, or work in an understaffed prison or a hospital, but its in already. Fight it totally if the issue is safety.
It is political in my opinion, I'm afraid. (Deluded though I am in many ways !)

 

[highdyke]

I accept DOO for many drivers is much less *preferable* than Guard operation and I don't discount what is being said about longer trains, busier platforms, image quality. Unfortunately, while the ORR and RSSB say it's safe, and it's been in operation for thirty years you have a PR problem. which won't be solved by anything said on this forum. Only peer-reviewed evidence to the contrary will convince me, people on this forum are far too self-interested to be trustworthy. In some cases try to be shut down debate to win arguments, which convinces me they are not fair-minded on the subject and have something to hide. Some people also are too political for me to take seriously too.

 

[the sniper]

I still find the whole 'this is political' argument thing to be incredible. If you know what staff are saying on the ground (or on here!) it seems ridiculous for people on the internet to keep pushing this politics angle, incredibly naive anyway. It simply hasn't been a factor in 99% of conversations I've ever had with colleagues (which has got to be with over 100+ rail staff, as it's sometimes all people ever talk about in train crew depots!) about DOO. Why the hell would getting shafted by DOO be any more palatable to us if Labour were pushing it rather than the Conservatives?!

I'll be amazed if the battle on Merseyside isn't one of the hardest fought in this DOO war. That'll be ASLEF and RMT against what I believe is a Labour controlled Combined Authority.

Argue the pros and cons of DOO/DCO if you still aren't bored of that, but don't waste time arguing that rail staff are fighting a political battle.

 

[Robertj21a]

I still find the whole 'this is political' argument thing to be incredible. If you know what staff are saying on the ground (or on here!) it seems ridiculous for people on the internet to keep pushing this politics angle, incredibly naive anyway. It simply hasn't been a factor in 99% of conversations I've ever had with colleagues (which has got to be with over 100+ rail staff, as it's sometimes all people ever talk about in train crew depots!) about DOO. Why the hell would getting shafted by DOO be any more palatable to us if Labour were pushing it rather than the Conservatives?!

I'll be amazed if the battle on Merseyside isn't one of the hardest fought in this DOO war. That'll be ASLEF and RMT against what I believe is a Labour controlled Combined Authority.

Argue the pros and cons of DOO/DCO if you still aren't bored of that, but don't waste time arguing that rail staff are fighting a political battle.

That all sounds fine until others often highlight that a Union is merely the sum of the members doing what the members want.

The President of the RMT wants to bring down the government........... something doesn't quite fit.

 

[AlterEgo]

So last night we went to No 30 James St, Liverpool and caught the 23.09 to Lime St and then the 23.38 to Piccadilly.

James St of course has a special relevance doesn't it. There were half a dozen people including events management agency people carefully sending down one lift at a time to restrict numbers on platforms. We had to queue for quite a while watching the well disciplined denizens of Liverpool "complying" with staff instructions and pushing in left right and centre.

As we were on a Loop platform we didn't see the Wirral platform - but from the number of people pushing in, drunk, refusing to listen to orders, etc, etc, it would have been interesting to see how some of these desk jockeys would have regarded the situation in real life.

Then we got to Lime St! There was an initial queue but it soon descended into an unruly drunk melee around the barrier with those who were sober enough to queue challenging the latecomers, while staff were notable by their absence and the police kept a distant watch but did nothing to keep order.

When a five car set arrived at P 8 a mad rush ensued and it was every man - or woman - for themselves. Eventually, wedged to the doors, we departed. Sure enough team rivalry broke out and fight started between rugby league fans of Warrington and Widnes. Friends tried to keep the two hotheads apart and reduce it to rival singing but at Widnes both parties decamped and a full scale battle started on the dark and unstaffed platform. No police had travelled on the train so anything could have happened, and from the bang on the bodywork as one of them went down next to where I was sitting I am glad I don't have his head today.

One man operation - safe - As if!!!!

It isn't - it never will be, and only desk bound button pushers would ever suggest it is.

I live in the real world, call it out for what it is, and wonder why, last night, I left the car in Manchester and used public transport! No-one who didn't have to would do it by choice!

Why would you choose James Street as an example of why guard operation is safer? Regardless of the guard's actions in that case, the RAIB report identified that if he had actually despatched the train properly he would have been in no position to see the victim.

 

[BestWestern]

I accept DOO for many drivers is much less *preferable* than Guard operation and I don't discount what is being said about longer trains, busier platforms, image quality. Unfortunately, while the ORR and RSSB say it's safe, and it's been in operation for thirty years you have a PR problem. which won't be solved by anything said on this forum. Only peer-reviewed evidence to the contrary will convince me, people on this forum are far too self-interested to be trustworthy. In some cases try to be shut down debate to win arguments, which convinces me they are not fair-minded on the subject and have something to hide. Some people also are too political for me to take seriously too.

So, Drivers fighting against the spread of something they widely consider significantly unsafe are "too self interested to be trustworthy"? Tell me, which aspect of "self interest" do you think those such as O L Leigh, with whose post only somebody on a crusade would disagree, are persuing? They are turning down additional renumeration, probably a lot of it, and pretty much limitless bargaining chips in striking against DOO. Yet, in the entrenched minds of some, they simply have to be up to something. And, still, the words of real life knowledge and experience stand for nothing, whilst a room full of clueless individuals would be infinitely more qualified to decide what is safe. What exactly do you think makes a roomfull of 'peers' experts on train dispatch? Their title?Their membership of the Masons/leading local golf club/etc? Or just their sheer pompous 'importance'? How sad that some are so naive and trusting of the Tory way.

 

[BestWestern]

Why would you choose James Street as an example of why guard operation is safer? Regardless of the guard's actions in that case, the RAIB report identified that if he had actually despatched the train properly he would have been in no position to see the victim.

Had he dispatched the train properly it wouldn't have moved with a drunken youth leaning against it. The Guard was negligent, the system works if done properly.

 

[AlterEgo]

Had he dispatched the train properly it wouldn't have moved with a drunken youth leaning against it. The Guard was negligent, the system works if done properly.

No, the method of working on Merseyrail at the time was for the guard to check the train was free from interference, then retreat inside the door he was working, close the door, give the ready to start signal, and remain by the door (which has no droplight) until the train clears the platform.

In the James Street case, the train was free from interference and the victim was up against the platform wall after the crowd dispersed, at which point the guard should have retreated inside his door. He would have been unable to see the victim leaning against the train. It is precisely because he did not follow the dispatch procedure, did in fact see the victim, and then dispatched the train anyway, that he was guilty of Manslaughter.

There were several posts about this at the time - that that was how all MR guards did it because dispatching the train "properly" because doing it by the rule book was unsafe!

 

[sarahj]

Thanks, does anyone know a rough timescale for when all non-171/313 routes will go over?

When I say plan, this is GTR's plan from memo's and their certainty that the new rosters/diagrams/ staff moving from conductors to OBS on a certain date. There are big internal discussions on the testing and agreement and someone has been very brave.

The plan is that from the 1st Jan all the remaining routes, including to Southampton and Portsmouth will go DOO for 377/387 (and 700's) run trains. 171/313/442/ trains do not have in cab CCTV and will run with a guard.

Plan is: Today (mon). Arun Valley Horsham to Bognor
Wed: Haywards Heath/Brighton to Littlehampton/Bognor

1st Jan Barnham - Portsmouth/Southampton
Brighton - Ore/Seaford
Haywards Heath - Lewes

 

[infobleep]

Yes, the Liverpool case changed everything. It's a job that carries responsibility. However, all railway staff has been given more and more aids over the years to prevent accidents. The Driver's role is very sanitised compared to what it was and many risks have been reduced to such an extent they can carry out DOO roles safely (in the RSSB, ORR opinion). So much so there's still probably more chance of a driver being prosecuted driving a road vehicle, even if they drive a train for a living. I see no problem if the drivers get extra pay and guard redundancy is handled by natural wastage. You can't expect nothing to change for the next 50 years.

But what about the eyes of the CPS. You forgot to mention them. They are the ones who prosecute, not the other bodies.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[northwichcat]

That is a massive understatement. I believe it will be a Lib Dem - Labour coalition in 2020 by current goings on. Lib Dems are actually starting to look like a very very competent party. Tories are descending back into the nasty party.

If you believe that, you'd believe anything...

No-one can predict what the election result will be in 2020. At the end of 2011 it would have been unthinkable that in 2015 the Lib Dems would have less than 10 seats and the SNP would have over 50 but that happened. At the moment we can't even say for certain that the Conservative or the Labour parties will still exist in their current form.

However, DOO is unlikely to have any effect on who wins the next election. The total number of driver jobs looks like they will be increasing for the foreseeable future so it's quite likely before 2020 the Conservatives will tell us how many extra people are employed in the rail industry and how much the average pay of a railway worker has increased by (mainly as a result of a higher proportion of railway workers being drivers.)

 

[FordFocus]

I still find the whole 'this is political' argument thing to be incredible. If you know what staff are saying on the ground (or on here!) it seems ridiculous for people on the internet to keep pushing this politics angle, incredibly naive anyway. It simply hasn't been a factor in 99% of conversations I've ever had with colleagues (which has got to be with over 100+ rail staff, as it's sometimes all people ever talk about in train crew depots!) about DOO. Why the hell would getting shafted by DOO be any more palatable to us if Labour were pushing it rather than the Conservatives?!

I'll be amazed if the battle on Merseyside isn't one of the hardest fought in this DOO war. That'll be ASLEF and RMT against what I believe is a Labour controlled Combined Authority.

Argue the pros and cons of DOO/DCO if you still aren't bored of that, but don't waste time arguing that rail staff are fighting a political battle.

It's not political but a safety issue on DOO however this is yet another own goal by the RMT with the President opening his mouth with some very hard left wing rubbish coming out. Mick Cash is on damage limitation saying he doesn't speak for the union or the dispute. Anyone sane enough will realise a few hundred guards on the South Coast isn't going to bring down any government. The RMT and ASLEF are right to state that Grayling is playing politics with this dispute, Ian Hislop summed it up very well. His track record of handling workers is appalling, look at the mess the justice system is in. Unofficial walkout by Prison Officers, the state of conditions and riots in prisons. Now it's been quoted in a national newspaper that a sum of nearly £1bn to put it right. I don't think May will buy this anti-union strike law proposal, they already tightened the law and actually did one of their manifesto promises. Brexit is a priority, not trade unions.

The Labour controlled councillors of Liverpool said they wanted £20m in cost savings to remove about 80% of the guards workforce and 'redeploy' the remainder. Mostly through natural wastage but I suspect they will ask for voluntary redundancies if these plans advance that far. Another tick in box for me that DOO is just cost saving and offers no improvements at all.

 

[FordFocus]

No-one can predict what the election result will be in 2020. At the end of 2011 it would have been unthinkable that in 2015 the Lib Dems would have less than 10 seats and the SNP would have over 50 but that happened. At the moment we can't even say for certain that the Conservative or the Labour parties will still exist in their current form.

On this rare occasion I find myself agreeing with your good self. The polls and bookies are getting a lot of decisions wrong. I'd add the rumoured hung parliament of 2015, Corbyn elected over Burnham, Brexit, Theresa May as PM, Donald Trump and Zac Goldsmiths political career going down the pan as incorrect predictions.

Brexit is becoming a huge farce and the last thing the government should be doing is Whitehall interfering with private train companies. Southern and ASLEF came to an agreement a few weeks ago but the DfT and Grayling blocked it.

 

[sonorguy]

To be fair, the current state of NOMS (ie the operational bit of the Prison Service) is not down to just Chris Grayling. My ex partner is a senior civil servant in the dept on the ops side and has had to put through real 40% cost savings over the last 8 years. Like most public sector organisations the only real way you can address costs is by staff reductions as that's by far the biggest cost you have.

Is Grayling part of the problem? Undoubtedly, but this goes back to Labour's time in power as well.

 

[FordFocus]

A fair comment sonorguy.

 

[O L Leigh]

Saying the agreements of 30 years ago aren't relevant today is a dangerous route for them to take, as I'm sure the company would love to review a lot more of those agreements...

I don't believe that anyone is suggesting that. What I said quite clearly is that the climate into which DOO was originally introduced over 30 years ago is different to the climate into which it is trying to be introduced now.

Of course doo isn't as safe as guard, and no I wouldn't want to work it any more than I wouldn't want drive a bus and sell tickets, or go to a fight as a single crewed police officer, or work in an understaffed prison or a hospital, but its in already. Fight it totally if the issue is safety.
It is political in my opinion, I'm afraid. (Deluded though I am in many ways !)

Many of us would love to fight it totally.

As for the other situations you illustrate, these are not necessarily comparable. If agreements have been broken then I would expect that the relevant trades unions would also be in dispute. If they are not then I think it would be safe to assume that no such agreements exist.

I accept DOO for many drivers is much less *preferable* than Guard operation and I don't discount what is being said about longer trains, busier platforms, image quality. Unfortunately, while the ORR and RSSB say it's safe, and it's been in operation for thirty years you have a PR problem. which won't be solved by anything said on this forum. Only peer-reviewed evidence to the contrary will convince me, people on this forum are far too self-interested to be trustworthy. In some cases try to be shut down debate to win arguments, which convinces me they are not fair-minded on the subject and have something to hide. Some people also are too political for me to take seriously too.

Then there is nothing more I can say to you. The RSSB report was hardly independent or lacked bias, as it seemed to line up nicely with Mr McNulty's equally flawed report, and yet you'd take their (non-peer reviewed) version of events. That the majority of incidents at the platform edge occur on DOO services (not that they tend to make the news) and that, even according to the RSSB's own Rule Book, despatch of DOO service, even at staffed stations, is done to a lower standard of safety has perhaps escaped your notice. The fact is that there is no independent peer reviewed evidence on either side, even though there are plenty of incident reports inside the industry as well as the anecdotal evidence of the frontline staff doing the job.

That all sounds fine until others often highlight that a Union is merely the sum of the members doing what the members want.

The President of the RMT wants to bring down the government........... something doesn't quite fit.

I believe that even the President of the RMT is allowed a personal opinion and to be able to express it if he so wishes, even if it was perhaps a little foolish of him to do so. Just to remind you, the RMT campaign is "Keep Guards on the Trains", not "Bring Down the Government".

O L Leigh

 

[Phil.]

I don't believe that anyone is suggesting that. What I said quite clearly is that the climate into which DOO was originally introduced over 30 years ago is different to the climate into which it is trying to be introduced now.



Many of us would love to fight it totally.

As for the other situations you illustrate, these are not necessarily comparable. If agreements have been broken then I would expect that the relevant trades unions would also be in dispute. If they are not then I think it would be safe to assume that no such agreements exist.



Then there is nothing more I can say to you. The RSSB report was hardly independent or lacked bias, as it seemed to line up nicely with Mr McNulty's equally flawed report, and yet you'd take their (non-peer reviewed) version of events. That the majority of incidents at the platform edge occur on DOO services (not that they tend to make the news) and that, even according to the RSSB's own Rule Book, despatch of DOO service, even at staffed stations, is done to a lower standard of safety has perhaps escaped your notice. The fact is that there is no independent peer reviewed evidence on either side, even though there are plenty of incident reports inside the industry as well as the anecdotal evidence of the frontline staff doing the job.



I believe that even the President of the RMT is allowed a personal opinion and to be able to express it if he so wishes, even if it was perhaps a little foolish of him to do so. Just to remind you, the RMT campaign is "Keep Guards on the Trains", not "Bring Down the Government".

O L Leigh

You are being naïve and disingenuous if you truly believe that the RMT leadership do not have a political aim in all of this. The RMT president in making the quoted remarks was not using the personal "I" but the collective "We". After a meeting in Brighton last September a Sunday Times reporter asked him (Hoyle) about claims that his and other unions were co-ordinating strikes in an effort to bring the government down. His reply? "Yes, we bloody are".
At the last strike picket at Brighton if a passenger had got on a soapbox and addressed the crowd of fellow passengers in words akin to, "they're doing it for your safety" he/she would have been metaphorically lynched.
With over half the trains on the BML being worked DOO the RMT continue to shoot itself in the foot as do the ASLE&F as their membership continue to drive DOO trains as they have done for over thirty years.
As both unions drone on about safety of the passengers they cannot see the irony of the passengers who are now taking to their cars at this time of the year adding to the already high number of injuries and deaths on the roads.

 

[Astradyne]

Good ole James Whale ... Mick Cash's record seems to get stuck!

http://talkradio.co.uk/news/james-w...er-your-own-ends-furious-southern-rail-clash#

 

[tsr]

When I say plan, this is GTR's plan from memo's and their certainty that the new rosters/diagrams/ staff moving from conductors to OBS on a certain date. There are big internal discussions on the testing and agreement and someone has been very brave.

The plan is that from the 1st Jan all the remaining routes, including to Southampton and Portsmouth will go DOO for 377/387 (and 700's) run trains. 171/313/442/ trains do not have in cab CCTV and will run with a guard.

Plan is: Today (mon). Arun Valley Horsham to Bognor
Wed: Haywards Heath/Brighton to Littlehampton/Bognor

1st Jan Barnham - Portsmouth/Southampton
Brighton - Ore/Seaford
Haywards Heath - Lewes

To be fair, there are still quite a few caveats and exceptions even to that extensive list of DOO, which will have to be covered by the remaining resources - and I think, from what I have seen, that if the coastal work does go DOO as planned, those exceptions will still be able to be covered and thus conductor-worked. Probably...!

377s also run up the WLL/WCML which, to the best of my knowledge, will not be fully cleared for DOO at this time. Sketchy reports indicate that Leatherhead-Guildford will now go DOO for the rare occasions when it is worked by 377s - not sure if that's for 1 January onwards or not - and of course the East Grinstead line is within the plans, though some conductors will still have to sign it as 171s get diverted there on occasions, and they've got to train up quite a few dispatchers first for the 377s anyway. The issue with 171s is not exclusively dispatch but also door opening - the same with 455s on some routes. If you took the conductor away then you couldn't run them on certain lines, sometimes quite high profile ones.

1st January has been imposed as the date for those conductors transferring to OBS roles and seems very definite from what I've read, which I think is what you are alluding to. Of course, if the testing and sign-off isn't complete before then, you won't have any conductors to dispatch 377s, so the work would only be able to be covered by the small pool of retained conductors who actually sign the various coastal routes!

~~~

Though it is somewhat grim to consider, I have been idly wondering if perhaps GTR could very soon end up with no conductors but two separate grades of OBS - say OBS-C for customer service only, and "retained" conductors transferred to an OBS-S role which is also safety-critical for those routes which temporarily retain door control by a second person. If the OBS contracts prove to be rather more flexible (or, for the cynical, dispensable!), or if there is mass confusion and press hysteria over the remaining 200 conductors still announcing themselves as such and working trains as normal in 2017 ("so GTR have failed to do things on time" etc. etc.), then I can see that it would not take much for at least the job title to change for the sake of unifying things, and possibly to make the T&Cs more flexible for the employer. The new OBS grade could be contracted to perform the role of the guard in exceptional circumstances on legacy stock, but broadly adhere to a roving "go anywhere" customer service model, until such time as the cynic predicts that it is disposed of. Then if the WCML is fully cleared and (say) battery/IPEMU Electrostars operate on the Marshlink / Uckfield lines, there merely remains a diminishing pool of non-safety-critical staff.

Not that I have any knowledge of any such plans or feel I would personally agree with the motives or (lack of) safety principles any of this... just speculation for the future! hock:

 

[highdyke]

Then there is nothing more I can say to you. The RSSB report was hardly independent or lacked bias, as it seemed to line up nicely with Mr McNulty's equally flawed report, and yet you'd take their (non-peer reviewed) version of events. That the majority of incidents at the platform edge occur on DOO services (not that they tend to make the news) and that, even according to the RSSB's own Rule Book, despatch of DOO service, even at staffed stations, is done to a lower standard of safety has perhaps escaped your notice. The fact is that there is no independent peer reviewed evidence on either side, even though there are plenty of incident reports inside the industry as well as the anecdotal evidence of the frontline staff doing the job.

The reason I'm taking that view I do is I have worked DOO. As a signaller you get a 'big railway' view rather than a 'one train' view of a Driver. I don't mean that in an offensive way, it's just that DOO really wasn't a concern, we would find out about any incident that affects that railway (delay/safety related) as we have to take the lead in the conversations and protect the safety of the line. So I am fully aware of what goes on. I have had many conversations with drivers during cab rides and general talks and they dislike intensely late night services with idiots on board and just them. I understand that completely and some services should have two on board. Whether that's a guard is another matter. I have no problem with the idea that OBS shuts doors either.

What is more a concern by a long way is level crossings. The number of near-misses and mis-use is frightening. I'd rather spend the money getting rid of those, they also cause a lot of operational problems.

I did address the door dispatch by saying. 1) Incidents are low per pass journey 2) the data has to be normalised with other risks.

 

[FordFocus]

The reason I'm taking that view I do is I have worked DOO. As a signaller you get a 'big railway' view rather than a 'one train' view of a Driver.

From a signallers point of view, what's the difference between conventional manned driver and guard trains compared with DOO-P? The only thing I'm aware of is DOO-P requires a PA function from the controlling signal box.

 

[Deepgreen]

The reason I'm taking that view I do is I have worked DOO. As a signaller you get a 'big railway' view rather than a 'one train' view of a Driver. I don't mean that in an offensive way, it's just that DOO really wasn't a concern, we would find out about any incident that affects that railway (delay/safety related) as we have to take the lead in the conversations and protect the safety of the line. So I am fully aware of what goes on. I have had many conversations with drivers during cab rides and general talks and they dislike intensely late night services with idiots on board and just them. I understand that completely and some services should have two on board. Whether that's a guard is another matter. I have no problem with the idea that OBS shuts doors either.

What is more a concern by a long way is level crossings. The number of near-misses and mis-use is frightening. I'd rather spend the money getting rid of those, they also cause a lot of operational problems.

I did address the door dispatch by saying. 1) Incidents are low per pass journey 2) the data has to be normalised with other risks.

Spend what money? The point is to save money (in the medium term) by translating roles to OBSs and then dispensing with the grade at the earliest opportunity.

 

[highdyke]

From a signallers point of view, what's the difference between conventional manned driver and guard trains compared with DOO-P? The only thing I'm aware of is DOO-P requires a PA function from the controlling signal box.

Mainly that, you'd get reports of defective DOO equipment, issues of troubles of trains which you would send the police or staff out to via route control instead of the guard arranging it (you would very, very rarely talk to guards). It was easier to stop DOO trains in emergency pre-GSMR, you would get fewer problems with trains in platforms awaiting guard especially during disruption.