(20 Nov 2016, 5:59 pm)northern156 wrote As you say the wrong thing here is losing pay and T&Cs that have been fought for.
I really cannot believe how anyone can think drivers operating doors is safer than a guard being 100% focussed on it (ie not driving a train) who can then stop the train should anything go pear shaped with dispatch, as what occasionally happens.

Regarding c2c - yeah it's a good thing trains nearby were stopped, brilliant! But what if it was the last train of the day with no others about? Having a guard on board means you've always got another member of staff nearby. Not pure chance that there was one two minutes ahead.
Yes the poor driver did die but after what was inevitably minutes of cardiac arrest. Had a guard been there to carry out CPR, or make an announcement for anyone trained in First Aid on the train to make themselves known - undoubtedly in less time than it was for everything to be arranged through the signaller, it could have been a better outcome; not worse.

With regard to door operation - surely the driver can be fully focused on door operation because the train is immobilised while the doors are open? Similarly the doors must be locked in order for the driver to move the train, by which point the driver can focus on driving. They never drive while operating doors and vice versa. While there is a logic to the argument two pairs of eyes are better than one - but it's entirely possible right now there are more train dispatches performed only by the driver than with a guard (factoring in DOO rail, light rail such as Metro and various tram systems). 

Finally back to the c2c incident - your argument could be reversed to say guards are at risk of becoming critically ill while alone in the rear cab where it could be a long time before they are discovered. Therefore it's safer not to have guards on the train. The sad incident is thankfully a rare occurrence which could have had a different outcome according to an infinite amount of variables - I don't think it holds much weight either way in the DOO argument.