Re: Re: Guard & Drivers Working Together.

[David Johnson <trainman@ozemail.com.au>]

On 8 Jun 2001 06:51:17 -0700, vorgestern@hotmail.com (Karina
Vor-daniken) wrote:

>So you approve of the guard sitting in the drivers seat.

It doesn't bother me usually, unless they are using it as a foot rest,
or an ash tray.

> [because it's
>more comfortable] 

I would disagree with that generalisation.  Most driver's seats are
more comfortable than Guard's seats, but not all of them.  I can't
stand the Bremshey seats as used on the G sets, nor some of the new
high back seats which are too narrow to fit into.

> Would not that tell you that the guards seat is a
>poor second cousin the drivers.

Not always.  When I was a guard, the guard's seat was quite adequate
when it was complete.

>  Are there regulations stating that
>guards are not authorised to sit on the drivers seat ? 

Yes.

>Regarding work location, I see little difference when a crew cab is
>some 10' foot by 6' foot.

Perhaps in a tangara, but in an S/K/R/L/C/V set, the driver's cab is 4
feet by 4 feet.

> Do you draw little yellow lines on floor
>saying don't cross this line: drivers or guards only.

No, there is a wall and a door.

> [they both work
>with the same space,

No they don't.  The driver "works" in his 4 foot square box.  The
guard "works" at the side doors and the PA console.

>Is the guard entitled to sit on the drivers seat ? Yes or no ?

No.

> And if
>you choose to argue, answer the questions with valid answers.  On
>suburban sets, do you agree that the drivers seat is more comfortable
>? It's a real easy question, yes or no ?

Not always, no.
>
>I stated: We appear to agree that nothing can be done for the guards
>regarding the air-conditioning simply because they have to open the
>door at platforms. [doing this vents the cab and nullifies the
>efficiency of the said] Can we agree on that fact.

On K/C sets, the guard's A/C is pathetic, but the driver's isn't much
better. 
On T/G sets, the A/C is powerful enough (when it works) to keep the
cab cool, even when the side doors are open.
On S/R/L sets, there is no A/C.  The guard has a circulating fan.  The
driver's fans have all been removed.  The only option for a driver to
try and keep cool is to open both side doors, all windows and the end
terminal door, taking the risk of severe injury if a bird gets sucked
into the cab.  A driver has to sit on a stinking hot seat in his
little 4 foot square box, while the guard can hang out the side in the
breeze.

>You stated: "Because they're not as greedy.  Guards keep agreeing to
>work longer hours.  If they don't like it can change.  Or demand
>shorter hours".  I would assume that the drivers would support this if
>they made a stand on this matter. 

Doesn't really affect us what the guards elect to do.

> I could draw the conclusion from
>your observations that guards obviously work longer hours because
>State Rail does not have enough of them to implement workable
>rostering. I would have thought this was a management problem.

No, they work longer hours, because they, through their union allowed
it.  Because they allowed it, management keep enough guards to work to
that agreement.   If drivers elected to work longer hours, then
management would have the opportunity to reduce numbers.

>Drivers do have a higher hourly rate we all know this. And we all
>accept they have a more important, more stressful, more demanding job.
>My argue is not centred on this fact. [I would assume this is why
>their shifts are shorter]

The shifts are shorter, because of a number of factors, including
horrid shift hours, heat fatigue, and a general desire to get away
from the trains for as long as possible.

>You stated drivers do deal with the public. Compared to guards, what
>would you consider their involvement with the public. What ratio would
>you think is appropriate compared to the guards. Say, on par. Perhaps
>10%.

Face to face contact would be about 60% guards, 40% drivers.

>A driver does not get wet when it's raining. You state:  "Not paying
>attention, he does". Oh, sorry water on the consol. How much, a litre.
>Enough to wet you radio or roster book.

And all the 120VDC buttons and switches, plus the bucket loads coming
through the front door and across the floor.

> Does every drivers cab suffer
>this affliction.

No.   Some are worse than others, but Tangaras are generally worst for
leaks.

>I stated: "I believe all drivers know their position has greater job
>satisfaction than the guards". You stated:  Probably, but you'd have
>to ask guards that have become Drivers to know the answer to that.
>[have you ever bothered to ask] If you have not been a guard, how can
>you draw conclusions.

I went driver, because that was something I always wanted to do.  I
found myself getting bored with the guard's job, filling out an
average of 3 Train Status reports a day on the list of defects with my
trains.

>Lets face it, the guard has the crap job. 

I disagree.  It's a good job, and can be quite satisfying if done
correctly.

>You stated: "$70,000+ pa to sit on your arse reading the paper all
>day" ? Bit of a blanket statement there. They all earn that do they ?

Nah, probably around $50,000 - $60,000 average.  About the same, or a
bit more than a driver.

>I suppose they don't mind working 10 hours a day & 13 shifts a
>fortnight. 

My pay packet is about the same as a guard I know.  He does 10 shifts
a fortnight, where I have to do 11 or 12 to get the same pay.

>What the shit do you think they should do. Stare
>mindlessly out the window all day.

Perhaps they could do their jobs more thoroughly.  They are paid a
pittance for a security allowance, so they could do regular patrols of
their trains when time allows.  If the public was to see them more
often, they would be more sorely missed if DOO was to be trialled.



David Johnson
trainman@ozemail.com.au
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~trainman/
------------------------------------
These comments are made in a private
capacity and do not represent the
official view of State Rail.
C.O.W.S. Page 11.