DS Forums

 
 

Do you care if there is a guard on the trains?


View Poll Results: Do you care if there is a guard on the trains?
Yes 50 57.47%
No 25 28.74%
Not Bothered 12 13.79%
Voters: 87. You can't vote on this poll right now - are you signed in?

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Yesterday, 09:45
koantemplation
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wolf359
Posts: 96,648

Southern Trains management say they want to introduce driver only trains for the benefit of customers.

But IMO they really want to do it to decrease costs and there is not only no benefit to driver only trains but things are worse without a guard on the train.

A driver should concentrate on driving the train and not be distracted by having to open and close doors or worry about trouble in the carriages.
While a guard can collect tickets, look out for passengers causing trouble, or for lost or dangerous luggage left and can get off the train at stations to make sure that closing the doors is safe to do.

This is so obviously a cost saving measure and nothing to do with the customers.
koantemplation is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old Yesterday, 10:01
blueisthecolour
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 10,840
Southern Trains management say they want to introduce driver only trains for the benefit of customers.

But IMO they really want to do it to decrease costs and there is not only no benefit to driver only trains but things are worse without a guard on the train.

A driver should concentrate on driving the train and not be distracted by having to open and close doors or worry about trouble in the carriages.
While a guard can collect tickets, look out for passengers causing trouble, or for lost or dangerous luggage left and can get off the train at stations to make sure that closing the doors is safe to do.

This is so obviously a cost saving measure and nothing to do with the customers.
Good. If those cost savings mean less pressure on ticket prices then surely that's a positive thing.

There needs to be a fundamental review of the pay and conditions of the entire rail industry as it makes no sense that ours is so expensive to run. If it's found that people are paid higher than international comparisons (or equivalent jobs in the UK) then there should be a permanent freeze on pay for existing staff and lower rates for new joiners.
blueisthecolour is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:04
OLD HIPPY GUY
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: I survived the killzone!
Posts: 18,241
As I never use the things I could not care one way or the other.
OLD HIPPY GUY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:06
koantemplation
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wolf359
Posts: 96,648
As I never use the things I could not care one way or the other.
There are many things I don't use, but I still care about worker's rights and that companies don't abuse workers, such as Sports Direct which I have never used and never will.
koantemplation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:06
koantemplation
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wolf359
Posts: 96,648
Good. If those cost savings mean less pressure on ticket prices then surely that's a positive thing.

There needs to be a fundamental review of the pay and conditions of the entire rail industry as it makes no sense that ours is so expensive to run. If it's found that people are paid higher than international comparisons (or equivalent jobs in the UK) then there should be a permanent freeze on pay for existing staff and lower rates for new joiners.
But that's the thing, the money saved won't go to reduce ticket prices it will go towards the share holders and profit.
koantemplation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:09
trevgo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Leafy London
Posts: 20,370
Commuted out of London on Anglia for donkeys years with driver only operated trains and never had a solitary problem (related to the OMO).

Certainly welcome a train captain to attend to passengers and turf the scrotes with a standard ticket out of First Class, but I couldn't care who closes the doors.

And neither does ASLEF. This is a political strike, nothing more. It has to be broken.
trevgo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:10
paulschapman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 24,726
Southern Trains management say they want to introduce driver only trains for the benefit of customers.

But IMO they really want to do it to decrease costs and there is not only no benefit to driver only trains but things are worse without a guard on the train.

A driver should concentrate on driving the train and not be distracted by having to open and close doors or worry about trouble in the carriages.
While a guard can collect tickets, look out for passengers causing trouble, or for lost or dangerous luggage left and can get off the train at stations to make sure that closing the doors is safe to do.

This is so obviously a cost saving measure and nothing to do with the customers.
What of the other lines which do not have guards?
paulschapman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:10
trevgo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Leafy London
Posts: 20,370
But that's the thing, the money saved won't go to reduce ticket prices it will go towards the share holders and profit.
Tosh.

There has been a guarantee of no redundancies, merely re-deployment.
trevgo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:11
LostFool
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 59,670
There are many things I don't use, but I still care about worker's rights and that companies don't abuse workers, such as Sports Direct which I have never used and never will.
How does not having a guard affect workers rights? If there is nobody there then they can't be "abused".

Actually, in most cases this isn't about reducing staff but redefining roles. You still need someone on board to check tickets and provide custom services but they don't necessarily need to be legally responsible for the doors.
LostFool is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:14
Annsyre
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 97,109
Southern Trains management say they want to introduce driver only trains for the benefit of customers.

But IMO they really want to do it to decrease costs and there is not only no benefit to driver only trains but things are worse without a guard on the train.

A driver should concentrate on driving the train and not be distracted by having to open and close doors or worry about trouble in the carriages.
While a guard can collect tickets, look out for passengers causing trouble, or for lost or dangerous luggage left and can get off the train at stations to make sure that closing the doors is safe to do.

This is so obviously a cost saving measure and nothing to do with the customers.

When the train stops
the driver is not driving and having to put his finger on a button and press it is hardly complicated or dangerous to passengers. He cannot start the train again until he has closed the doors which again is not a dangerous procedure.

The guard's job used to be to guard valuables etc. in the guard's van which are non-exisistent now on most trains
Annsyre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:17
platelet
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GL51 0EX
Posts: 14,085
Southern Trains management say they want to introduce driver only trains for the benefit of customers.
Are you sure? The changes that they have been arguing about for months is simply the guards role being "a guard can collect tickets, look out for passengers causing trouble, or for lost or dangerous luggage left " etc. As long as the guards turn up for work - they'd be on the train

This is so obviously a cost saving measure and nothing to do with the customers.
Well as there will still be guards on the train (apart from when they are striking) it won't save a lot (unless they strike a lot)

Actually it puts revenue at risk. The real thing the union is fighting is the fact that when the guards go on strike in future - Southern could still run the trains - just run a higher risk of revenue loss with people travelling without tickets.

It's about the power of the guards to disrupt the service being diminished
platelet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:18
jmclaugh
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Devon
Posts: 47,965
There are lots of trains operating without guards so this focus on Southern Trains doing it seems illogical. I don't see a driver opening and closing the doors while in a station as a distraction or as a safety issue.

There is certainly a cost saving but as to whether that benefits passengers in terms of lower price rises or a better service is ano matter.
jmclaugh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:22
koantemplation
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wolf359
Posts: 96,648

When the train stops
the driver is not driving and having to put his finger on a button and press it is hardly complicated or dangerous to passengers. He cannot start the train again until he has closed the doors which again is not a dangerous procedure.

The guard's job used to be to guard valuables etc. in the guard's van which are non-exisistent now on most trains
“You’ve got to drive this thing: it doesn’t drive itself. A driver has enough to concentrate on without having to worry what’s going on behind him. There have been incidents where drivers have made mistakes when there’s been a ruckus going on in the coach behind them. You’re thinking: what’s going on in there? And before you know it you’ve made a mistake, missed a station or gone past a red
https://www.theguardian.com/business...s-have-to-stay
koantemplation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:26
welwynrose
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Posts: 29,545
There hasn't been a guard on my trainline for years
welwynrose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:29
trevgo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Leafy London
Posts: 20,370
How many accidents have been caused in the last 30 years because a guard didn't close the doors.

Straightforward question, binary answer required.
trevgo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:31
koantemplation
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wolf359
Posts: 96,648
How many accidents have been caused in the last 30 years because a guard didn't close the doors.

Straightforward question, binary answer required.
I don't know I tried to google how many accidents happened when they were driver only trains vs guarded trains but couldn't find any stats.

But that's the trouble with statistics. They don't show the true picture anyway.

Companies only care about profit, and they'll have driverless trains let alone driver only trains if it means more money for them.
koantemplation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:54
Jayceef1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kent
Posts: 3,026
I don't know I tried to google how many accidents happened when they were driver only trains vs guarded trains but couldn't find any stats.

But that's the trouble with statistics. They don't show the true picture anyway.

Companies only care about profit, and they'll have driverless trains let alone driver only trains if it means more money for them.
The DLR has been running driverless trains for many years without any problems.
Jayceef1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:58
Annsyre
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 97,109
The DLR has been running driverless trains for many years without any problems.
Exactlty and there have been no incidents afaik of anyone dying because of it.
Annsyre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 11:00
Annsyre
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 97,109
When the driver is is in the driver's cab he is not in any contact with passengers who are in passenger coaches and cannot be distracted by their behaviour.

If a riot breaks out amongst passengers then all a passenger has to do is press the emergency button. What more could a guard do than that?
Annsyre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 11:14
The_Moth
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,687
The real thing the union is fighting is the fact that when the guards go on strike in future - Southern could still run the trains - just run a higher risk of revenue loss with people travelling without tickets.

It's about the power of the guards to disrupt the service being diminished
Correct. Without the power to disrupt services, ASLEF would find itself much weaker when representing their members who could see terms and conditions eroded. Potentially employees would decide not to join the union which threatens it's existence. However, the union cannot say this so they are hiding behind the safety issue.

I understand that earlier this year a board member was quoted as saying that they wanted to "smash" the union and downgrading the role of the guard is just the first step in doing this. Once the trains can be run without guards then irrespective of current "guarantees", the company will be able to further diminish or remove the role altogether without much effective opposition.
The_Moth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 11:20
malpasc
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,342
Exactlty and there have been no incidents afaik of anyone dying because of it.
The DLR is self contained and doesn't mix with other lines or services so the chances of an incident occurring are lower. Plus most of the DLR is 'new' compared to mainline rail.

Whether they're called 'guards' or 'customer service assistants' I think on mainline train services there should be another member of staff other than the driver, to assist with customer issues etc, keep an eye on anti social behaviour, and be able to help if an incident arose.
malpasc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 11:23
LostFool
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 59,670
Companies only care about profit, and they'll have driverless trains let alone driver only trains if it means more money for them.
I would have no problem with driverless trains if they can be proven to be safe. At least they wouldn't go on strike at the drop of a hat or turn up to work drunk.
LostFool is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 11:32
platelet
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GL51 0EX
Posts: 14,085
Whether they're called 'guards' or 'customer service assistants' I think on mainline train services there should be another member of staff other than the driver, to assist with customer issues etc, keep an eye on anti social behaviour, and be able to help if an incident arose.
It's fortunate then that that is what Southern are proposing
platelet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 11:33
Caxton
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 24,058
When the driver is is in the driver's cab he is not in any contact with passengers who are in passenger coaches and cannot be distracted by their behaviour.

If a riot breaks out amongst passengers then all a passenger has to do is press the emergency button. What more could a guard do than that?
I would imagine that the distraction would be far greater for a bus or coach driver than a train driver would who has far more contact with the passengers if they rioted, with the train unlikely to steer off the track or plough into a number of people. Far easier for a bus driver to miss a red light if distracted, with no built in warning of safety device, or run off the road. All this with the bus or coach driver getting far less pay than a train driver.

ASLEF are trying very hard to justify the need for a guard in the same way they did when they wanted two people in the driver's cab of diesel trains when firemen were no longer needed to stoke coal and keep the fires burning when steam trains were no longer used
Caxton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 11:41
jmclaugh
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Devon
Posts: 47,965
I would imagine that the distraction would be far greater for a bus or coach driver than a train driver would who has far more contact with the passengers if they rioted, with the train unlikely to steer off the track or plough into a number of people. Far easier for a bus driver to miss a red light if distracted, with no built in warning of safety device, or run off the road. All this with the bus or coach driver getting far less pay than a train driver.

ASLEF are trying very hard to justify the need for a guard in the same way they did when they wanted two people in the driver's cab of diesel trains when firemen were no longer needed to stoke coal and keep the fires burning when steam trains were no longer used
I think the danger of passengers rioting will be because they haven't got any trains.
jmclaugh is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:31.