Rant - train conductors/guards

giraffe69 wrote: »

Of course only a "guard" could organise the back up train! The problems in Southern and SW Trains seem to me (as a user) to be part Network Rail and part staff deciding they don't want to work. The rest of the time the service works ok. Not to say management should get off scot free, they also are partly responsible for the shortcomings. I'd certainly rather the franchise was run as a business than the mess that was British Rail prior to privatisation. Noticeable that for all the imperfections many more people travel by train now than did, say, 20 years ago.

Well there was no one else there that was responsible? People forget that the guard is in charge of the train. The driver drives, drivers have enough responsibility. That's why they did not work/strike they did not want the responsibility thrust on them for passenger safety

Also train fares are subsidised by government to encourage people to use public transport. With expensive cars, tax, fuel insurance, parking fees, etc it seems to be working.

If British Rail had the investment / money that is now thrown at private franchises by the government it would probably now be the best in the world.

According to the RMT and ASLEF, yes. A guard is needed on all services to ensure safe train dispatch.

According to the RSSB, no. They have said that DOO (Driver Only Operation) is safe. However they have admitted that this increases the risk of something going wrong and if it goes wrong then it will become more severe.

See this RSSB video as an example of what can go wrong either way:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkObrSYisIw

Absolutely Driver Only Operation is safe; anyone who claims it isn't is going against the RSSB, who clearly know best, and therefore you can take anything they say with a pinch of salt.



It's far safer to be on a DOO train than almost any other mode of land-based transport!


The high profile recent disputes about Guards involve routes where there is no suggestion that the only member of staff booked to be on any particular train is the driver. The proposals are for the second person to be an 'On Board Supervisor' (OBS), Travelling Ticket Inspector (TTI) or similar, to provide customer services duties.


The key difference between these roles and the role of Guard is that they are not involved in the operation of the train, e.g. they do not do the doors.


I saw track detonators mentioned above. Let there be no doubt: this is an archaic method of warning other trains of an incident such as a derailment. A modern railway has proper communications channels, including an emergency stop feature to stop all trains in a particular area, that is far safer than the old method of a Guard getting out of a train and walking along the track laying detonators to warn oncoming trains to stop. Think about it!


What the modern railway needs is staff who are able to check tickets, advise on connections, answer queries, assist passengers. They should be free to continue carrying out these customer service duties, even when the train comes to a stop at a station.



It's an archaic practice for a train to stop in a station and for the doors not to open until the Guard has finished checking or selling tickets, walks to a door and then opens it. This should be done by the driver, as is done in almost all modern systems throughout the world.


A second person is needed in many lines; no sensible person is claiming that they are not needed. But that person should be able to do the job in a manner that is best value for taxpayers and customers; they should not be burdened with having to open doors!

Hasbeen wrote: »

...This includes putting safety devices direct onto the rails and also placing at 1.25 miles from the train the use of explosive detonators. If driver is OK they each have specific tasks


It is definately not the role of a customer service person...

I agree it is not the job of a customer service person to leave the train in an emergency situation and to walk 1.25 miles down the track, to place explosive detonators to warn oncoming trains of ab obstruction on the track.


But, this is 2019; it should not be the role of anyone to have to do that! I'm sorry to say this but you need to move with the times!


Another key difference is that on many routes the Guard can remain in the back cab, or an office, if they wish. An OBS/OBM/TTI is not allowed to do that; they have to be patrolling the customer areas of the train.

Hasbeen wrote: »

Trains do run with only the driver as Driver operated only. Usually in built up area's where emergency services are easily available.

Driver Only Operation includes routes that go well beyond built up areas, including:

• Scotrail electric services in the Glasgow area, which go as far as places like Ayr and other coastal towns, well beyond the built-up area of Glasgow. These trains have TTIs who check tickets.
• Southeastern High Speed services, from St Pancras to the Kent Coast. These have an On Board Manager (OBM) who is safety critical but is not involved in the operation of the train.
• The vast majority of services operated by GTR are driver only operated. GTR is the largest train operating company in Britain. Their inner suburban services have no staff other than the driver, but the outer services, which again go through rural areas to the coastal towns, do have On Board Supervisors (OBS). The GTR line to King's Lynn is very rural in places and that has operated safely as DOO for decades.
• Almost all Chiltern services between Banbury and Marylebone
• All London Overground services (note that customer satisfaction on these routes is far higher than it was under the old operators, such as Silverlink who used to have Guards on some of those lines, but the Guards tended to be invisible to most passengers and did not check tickets or walk through the customer areas of the trains)
• Many GWR services out of Paddington, towards places such as Newbury and Oxford.
• There are many more examples, too numerous to mention them all!

Hasbeen wrote: »

The train companes try to do this at the risk of passenger safety to save money.

This is categorically not true.


It is not unsafe; the Rail Safety Standards Board (RSSB) sets higher standards for rail in this country than is the case for just about any other land-based transport you could think of, and the railways in this country are safer than in the majority of other countries with railway systems. It is completely untrue to suggest that safety is compromised.


The majority of passenger journeys on rail in Great Britain are on DOO services; the GB rail safety record is very good.


It is not up to train companies which routes are DOO anyway; this is actually determined by the Department for Transport. It is also wrong to suggest that moving people from Guard roles to OBS/OMB/TTI roles increases profits for the train companies; it actually reduces subsidy from taxpayers.

Hasbeen wrote: »

Most passengers are oblivious of their role and only see tickets getting checked and general helpfulness.

I agree that most passengers are oblivious of their role, but you are deliberately painting an inaccurate picture.


Let's take another high profile company: South Western Railway (SWR). Their inner suburban trains around the London area have Guards who are non-commercial, so you will never see them checking tickets. They are effectively there to operate doors, despite these routes being very similar to lines operated by GTR and London Overground. It makes no sense at all!

Hasbeen wrote: »

One of the main aspects of the role is doors opening/closing as they, not a driver with limited cctv view can monitor passenger behaviour safely. People getting trapped and pulled under is not desired.

Actually on curved platforms, it can be safer to view high quality CCTV footage and/or employ platform staff, than have a Guard use their own eyes.


You say people getting trapped and pulled under is not desired; I agree. But having a Guard does not eliminate that risk, and here is the proof:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/547c8fb3e5274a4290000173/R192014_140918_Newcastle.pdf

Once closed and locked, the ‘doors locked’ indicator illuminated on the conductor’s panel. On seeing this, he instructed the driver to depart, using the communication buzzer. The train began to move around 8 seconds after the doors had closed. The train reached an estimated maximum speed of 5 mph (8 km/h) and travelled an estimated distance of 20 metres. The train moved for approximately 8 seconds during which the trapped passenger had to move along the platform to stay on her feet.

By all means campaign to have a second member of staff on the train; I will totally agree with this argument.


But to suggest that the trains operated by the likes of Scotrail, Southeastern and GTR on routes such as Glasgow to Ayr, London to Dover, or London to Eastbourne, on which there is a member of staff to check tickets and provide customer service, are somehow "unsafe" when compared to trains operated by SWR in the London area, which have Guards who do not check tickets, is absolutely absurd and utterly incorrect.