Role of the dispatcher

[whole diary]

[Tim]

How does a Guard opening and closing doors keep his competancy in evacuation and train protection up to scratch?

Presumably through regular training and re-training.  Would probably be too expensive to do this with all staff.

But would presumably cost exactly the same to put a TPE^▸ (Trans Pennine Express) rather than a Guard through.

I am all for retaining guards on trains (or at least someone with the training and competance of a guard).  It still seems antiquated to me though to have that person open and close the doors.  And something is wrong if the only way to retain a safety-competent second person on a train is to give them the job of opening and closing the doors.  But I supose oif you give the driver those roles you need extra platform equipment which will only pay for itself if you get rid of the guards (either compleetly or replace them with someone cheaper)

 

[dog box]

Tim ..i think you might find that on a lot of modern stock, the Driver opens the doors on arrival at the platform and closes them when signalled to do so by the guard...i belive this is the system employed on AXC^» (Arriva Cross Country - about) Voyagers

[Super Guard]

Tim ..i think you might find that on a lot of modern stock, the Driver opens the doors on arrival at the platform and closes them when signalled to do so by the guard...i belive this is the system employed on AXC^» (Arriva Cross Country - about) Voyagers

Correct.

One thing that might not have been mentioned... if Drivers are being given more responsibilities (ie. responsibility for doors), I am pretty sure more responsibilities = more salary.  TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) may save on paying a Ticket Examiner less on the train, but if it means paying the driver more plus the required equipment at stations, then I don't see the financial benefit at all.

[readytostart]

Tim ..i think you might find that on a lot of modern stock, the Driver opens the doors on arrival at the platform and closes them when signalled to do so by the guard...i belive this is the system employed on AXC^» (Arriva Cross Country - about) Voyagers

As DG said, correct, also the case on FGW^▸ (First Great Western) turbos when operated with a guard, I think with Southern on their electrostars the driver opens doors but the guard has their own door close buttons thru the train.
On a Voyager throughout the dispatch procedure there is a live audio link to the driver whenever the guards key is turned using the same speaker/mic as the passcomm.

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

Strike 'will not affect train services'

Rail bosses have claimed they will be able to operate at least "nine out of 10" trains when some staff strike in Scotland on Saturday.
About 550 members of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport (RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers)) will take part in the action, planned for 20 February, 1 March and 13 March.
They are angry at plans by ScotRail to run the new Edinburgh/Glasgow via Airdrie route without conductors.
ScotRail said the system had operated on other lines for years.
The 13 March strike coincides with the Scotland/England Six Nations rugby match at Murrayfield in Edinburgh.
RMT workers across Scotland, including conductors, drivers and sleeper-train managers, will take part in the strike.
The new ^300m Edinburgh/Glasgow via Airdrie route is due to open in December, with trains operated by drivers and ticket examiners only, which prompted the moves for strike action.
Steve Montgomery, managing director of ScotRail, said: "Our contingency plans are such that almost all our customers will not notice there is a strike."
He added: "However, we have had to revise some services because of the RMT's bid to cause as much inconvenience as possible to our customers."
A number of rural services have been cancelled and will be replaced by buses.
RMT accused ScotRail of using "strike breakers" and said it had broken assurances given to the union almost 10 years ago.
Bob Crow, RMT general secretary, said: "Flying in managers from the south coast, and sticking them on ScotRail services with just a few hours training and with no knowledge of the routes, is a recipe for disaster. They are deliberately ignoring the crucial safety role played by the guards on their services."

[JayMac]

Headline is immediately contradicted in the first line of the story!

My reading is that up to 10% of services will be affected. Maybe small beer and I'm all for TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s sticking it to Commie Bob, but 1 in 10 trains not running is still a significant disruption, particularly if your usual service is one of the 10% affected.

[Tim]

Tim ..i think you might find that on a lot of modern stock, the Driver opens the doors on arrival at the platform and closes them when signalled to do so by the guard...i belive this is the system employed on AXC^» (Arriva Cross Country - about) Voyagers

Ok thanks.  I didn't know that.  Just seems more sensible to me because the driver is more likely to be near a button than the guard.

[JayMac]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

Strike action over rail service  
 
Train passengers could face disruption as members of the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) union begin the first of three 24-hour strikes. The dispute, involving about 550 workers, is over plans to operate without conductors on a new service between Glasgow and Edinburgh.

RMT General Secretary Bob Crow said the arrangement on the new Airdrie-Bathgate route would jeopardise public safety.

First Scotrail denied the safety concerns and said it would be "business as usual" during the strike. The ^300m Airdrie to Bathgate rail link is due to open in December. It is designed to complete the "missing link" for communities between Glasgow and Edinburgh, such as areas of North Lanarkshire and West Lothian. Under its contract with Scottish ministers, First Scotrail is required to have a second person on the train at all times. First ScotRail wants to operate trains using drivers and ticket examiners and not conductors.

Managing director of First ScotRail, Steve Montgomery, said: "The trains will be no different from those which have operated in Strathclyde for 25 years.  It appears the RMT is now saying these trains are unsafe. But for more than two decades they have carried 56% of passengers and they are also no different from those on the Larkhall branch line which reopened four years ago without objection from the RMT."

Mr Crow said: "Scotrail have been caught out once again playing fast and loose with public safety. They are deliberately ignoring the crucial safety role played by the guards on their services. Rather than admitting that they have existing agreements with the union and with the Scottish Parliament that rule out driver-only operation, Scotrail are taking every opportunity to ignore the safety issues and to resort to out and out provocation."

Contingency plans

The company said it intended to run at least nine out of 10 trains across Scotland during the strike. Mr Montgomery added: "It is business as usual for Scotland's railway. Our contingency plans are such that almost all our customers will not notice there is a strike." A number of rural services will be replaced by buses. A small number of services have been cancelled.

First Scotrail has previously said that if the new trains were to be operated by conductors, ^1.4m would have to be spent converting the trains for their use. It said the modifications would also delay the timing of the new route opening.

RMT workers across Scotland have also voted for strike action on 1 March and 13 March.

 

[jetice]

Almost completely agree with you Insider. 

Your arguements convince me that it is better to have two members of staff on a train than just one.  However, that is not quite the same thing as saying that the driver shouldn't be permitted to control the doors and dispatch the train leaving the second member of staff to control/look after the passengers.  The Scotrail proposal for their new service includes DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)), but not single manning of trains.  The trains would be staffed by a driver and a ticket examiner.

There have been many complaints on this board about the invisability of guards on trains and lack of ticket checks / throwing scrotes out of FC^‡(resolve) etc.  The arguments put forward in defence of the guards are usually along the lines of pointing out the guard's safety critical role and the fact that he may be busy with dispatch etc.  If the driver and/or platform staff dealt with that stuff, the second member of staff could concentrate on passenger facing duties and still be avilable and trained to do assist in evacuation and train protection in a serious emergency.   

I realise that DOO is difficult to implement on lightly used routes and requires extra platform equipment, but the fact that the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) have resisted allowing the driver to open the doors (with the guard closing them) reveals to be that the resistance to DOO is at least in part driven by self interest rather than safety concerns.

I'm afraid that if the second person is a T/E they will not be trained in safety procedures so will not be able to help out only perhaps in the most basic of ways...that is the whole point of having a guard on the train! The conductor is an amalgamation of the old guard and ticket inspector combined - the ticket examiner on a doo train will only do tickets - they have no knowledge of the route, how to stop the train in an emergency, or how to lay track circuit clips or detonators, they are not trained on the routes so possibly would not even know where they were or where the nearest help would be in the case of an emergency.  If they are trained to do this then they WILL be a guard!!!!!!!!!!

[super tm]

Almost completely agree with you Insider. 

Your arguements convince me that it is better to have two members of staff on a train than just one.  However, that is not quite the same thing as saying that the driver shouldn't be permitted to control the doors and dispatch the train leaving the second member of staff to control/look after the passengers.  The Scotrail proposal for their new service includes DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)), but not single manning of trains.  The trains would be staffed by a driver and a ticket examiner.

There have been many complaints on this board about the invisability of guards on trains and lack of ticket checks / throwing scrotes out of FC^‡(resolve) etc.  The arguments put forward in defence of the guards are usually along the lines of pointing out the guard's safety critical role and the fact that he may be busy with dispatch etc.  If the driver and/or platform staff dealt with that stuff, the second member of staff could concentrate on passenger facing duties and still be avilable and trained to do assist in evacuation and train protection in a serious emergency.   

I realise that DOO is difficult to implement on lightly used routes and requires extra platform equipment, but the fact that the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) have resisted allowing the driver to open the doors (with the guard closing them) reveals to be that the resistance to DOO is at least in part driven by self interest rather than safety concerns.

I'm afraid that if the second person is a T/E they will not be trained in safety procedures so will not be able to help out only perhaps in the most basic of ways...that is the whole point of having a guard on the train! The conductor is an amalgamation of the old guard and ticket inspector combined - the ticket examiner on a doo train will only do tickets - they have no knowledge of the route, how to stop the train in an emergency, or how to lay track circuit clips or detonators, they are not trained on the routes so possibly would not even know where they were or where the nearest help would be in the case of an emergency.  If they are trained to do this then they WILL be a guard!!!!!!!!!!

DOO has been operating safely for over 20 years.  The RMT would be better campaigning for the Strathclyde arrangement where a TE is on the train.  That would be better for passengers and RMT would get more members.  The reason DOO has not extended much in the last 10 years is because of privatisation.  IF the railway had not been privatised then DOO would be much more widespread than now.  Huge area of the network are already DOO.

All of Thames link, most of South Eastern, Southern, , Chiltern, Great Western Thames Valley and all Scotrailservices around Glasgow.  Face it we are not going to go back to having Guards on trains.

[jetice]

Almost completely agree with you Insider. 

Your arguements convince me that it is better to have two members of staff on a train than just one.  However, that is not quite the same thing as saying that the driver shouldn't be permitted to control the doors and dispatch the train leaving the second member of staff to control/look after the passengers.  The Scotrail proposal for their new service includes DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)), but not single manning of trains.  The trains would be staffed by a driver and a ticket examiner.

There have been many complaints on this board about the invisability of guards on trains and lack of ticket checks / throwing scrotes out of FC^‡(resolve) etc.  The arguments put forward in defence of the guards are usually along the lines of pointing out the guard's safety critical role and the fact that he may be busy with dispatch etc.  If the driver and/or platform staff dealt with that stuff, the second member of staff could concentrate on passenger facing duties and still be avilable and trained to do assist in evacuation and train protection in a serious emergency.   

I realise that DOO is difficult to implement on lightly used routes and requires extra platform equipment, but the fact that the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) have resisted allowing the driver to open the doors (with the guard closing them) reveals to be that the resistance to DOO is at least in part driven by self interest rather than safety concerns.

I'm afraid that if the second person is a T/E they will not be trained in safety procedures so will not be able to help out only perhaps in the most basic of ways...that is the whole point of having a guard on the train! The conductor is an amalgamation of the old guard and ticket inspector combined - the ticket examiner on a doo train will only do tickets - they have no knowledge of the route, how to stop the train in an emergency, or how to lay track circuit clips or detonators, they are not trained on the routes so possibly would not even know where they were or where the nearest help would be in the case of an emergency.  If they are trained to do this then they WILL be a guard!!!!!!!!!!

DOO has been operating safely for over 20 years.  The RMT would be better campaigning for the Strathclyde arrangement where a TE is on the train.  That would be better for passengers and RMT would get more members.  The reason DOO has not extended much in the last 10 years is because of privatisation.  IF the railway had not been privatised then DOO would be much more widespread than now.  Huge area of the network are already DOO.

All of Thames link, most of South Eastern, Southern, , Chiltern, Great Western Thames Valley and all Scotrailservices around Glasgow.  Face it we are not going to go back to having Guards on trains.

I notice that the areas that you have advised DOO operates are all highly built up areas and in those areas at least if no guard then help shouldn't be too far away but no way should services which have long areas of open countryside and often unstaffed stations operate with no guard...but why do you think it would be better to have DOO.....would you not feel safer with a trained guard on board.

[super tm]

There must be some pretty isolated areas between Bedford and Brighton.

[IndustryInsider]

There must be some pretty isolated areas between Bedford and Brighton.

And between Hungerford and Bedwyn, Heyford and Kings Sutton etc....

[jetice]

There must be some pretty isolated areas between Bedford and Brighton.

And between Hungerford and Bedwyn, Heyford and Kings Sutton etc....

There are miles and miles of open and often mountainous countryside in Scotland and unstaffed stations and sparse population so believe me when I say that passengers would be far better off having a trained guard on board than a ticket examiner should the driver be incapacitated!

[IndustryInsider]

I'm not necessarily disagreeing that having a guard on board trains is a bad idea, and I've said before that somebody else other than the driver with some sort of safety/emergency training would be of great help should something bad happen.

But it's wrong to suggest that Glasgow to Edinburgh via Aidrie and Bathgate is mountainous and isolated which is the route this thread is discussing.  The most 'isolated' section between Airdie and Bathgate mostly runs parallel to the A89 for example, so we're not exactly talking about being stuck in the Cairngorms here!