East West Rail Timetable

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

They're not - and that's the problem.

The RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) require Chiltern to employ a second safety-critical trained person on each train in passenger service., effectively doubling the staff costs for each train. The DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) refuse to pay.

[Oxonhutch]

I consider myself to be a socially progressive professional, but thankfully no longer fear losing my job, being recently retired. I am a strong supporter of unions in jobs that invite exploitation and abuse - the sacked London bus driver is a case in point. I have willing been a union member in my past.

But this is beyond the pale.

Holding me, the general public hostage to their broader squabbles is outrageous, and I - a previous supporter - am incensed that this 1970's 'demarkation' is allowed to persist.

More train services mean more trains; and more trains mean more train staff. For goodness sake, climb out of your 70's militant mind set and embrace a new way forward where modern public transport is the norm, not a legacy item for those that can't afford, or care to use, a private car.

[ray951]

They're not - and that's the problem.

The RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) require Chiltern to employ a second safety-critical trained person on each train in passenger service., effectively doubling the staff costs for each train. The DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) refuse to pay.

Thanks, ChrisB — this isn't aimed at you personally, and I appreciate you’re not speaking for RMT, Chiltern, GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway), etc. So the words you used may not be those used by those organisations.

That said, the phrase “the RMT require” is an interesting one and really ought to be challenged. Require on what authority? Since when do unions set operational requirements, and where are the management in this? Are the RMT funding these “requirements”, or are they simply being accepted? What about the passengers (nee customers) and taxpayers who pay for all this, do they get a say?

I get the desire to avoid industrial action, but management can’t keep deferring this indefinitely.  The unions must know this argument was settled decades ago. They should call the RMT's bluff and schedule some trains, of course that is wasy for me to say.

[Electric train]

They're not - and that's the problem.

The RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) require Chiltern to employ a second safety-critical trained person on each train in passenger service., effectively doubling the staff costs for each train. The DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) refuse to pay.

Thanks, ChrisB — this isn't aimed at you personally, and I appreciate you’re not speaking for RMT, Chiltern, GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway), etc. So the words you used may not be those used by those organisations.

That said, the phrase “the RMT require” is an interesting one and really ought to be challenged. Require on what authority? Since when do unions set operational requirements, and where are the management in this? Are the RMT funding these “requirements”, or are they simply being accepted? What about the passengers (nee customers) and taxpayers who pay for all this, do they get a say?

I thing the term "the RMT require"  is acceptable from online Cambridge Dictionary "to need something or make something necessary" the RMT "need the second safety critical person" based on the mandate they have from their members.

I get the desire to avoid industrial action, but management can’t keep deferring this indefinitely.  The unions must know this argument was settled decades ago. They should call the RMT's bluff and schedule some trains, of course that is wasy for me to say.

Ultimately the management could force this through, but its not in the best interests of the industrial relations; there is generally a good working relationship between the TU's and rail management I suspect there are discussions taking place to resolve this issue 

[grahame]

Tangential - ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) have posted

Defeated! The Conservatives have failed in their attempt to amend the Railways Bill, which will establish Great British Railways, to:
* Remove the right to strike
* Reduce training
* Limit annual leave
* Forcibly introduce driver-only operated trains

ASLEF lobbied strongly against these amendments, which would not have served staff or passengers.
It’s on to the next step for the Bill that will bring together track and train and help establish a railway designed for people, not profit.

[ChrisB]

Well, well, well......but don't hold your breath quite yet!

From a written question in Parliament, answered yesterday by Lord Hendy....

To ask His Majesty's Government whether the first East West Rail services between Oxford and Milton Keynes Central via Winslow have been included in the base train timetable.

Answer

Answered on
4 June 2026

Chiltern worked with Network Rail, DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) and other operators on the December 2026 timetable and services have been timetabled between Oxford, Winslow, Bletchley and Milton Keynes. The Department continues to work closely with Chiltern Railways and other partners to confirm a start date for the first East-West Rail services between Oxford and Milton Keynes Central via Winslow.

[ray951]

According to the latest Oxford Clarion we may have a solution to the problem of 'guards' on trains:
"Chiltern is now advertising for Customer Service Inspectors to work from its Bletchley depot, the base for East West Rail services. The inspectors will perform guard-like duties such as “provide a high level of customer care on trains”, “take part in revenue protection activities on trains”, “perform on-train announcing”, and “take action to rectify or report faults”.

The train doors will still be operated by drivers, not guards, so services could run without a second staff member in exceptional circumstances – as is common south of London. An internal Government document says that issues at Winslow station will not obstruct entry to service, and that the trains have been upgraded to support ‘Superpower mode’, which improves acceleration, to meet the tight timetable. With Chiltern due to be nationalised on 20 September, a December start date for the Oxford–Milton Keynes service is now widely expected."

https://oxfordclarion.uk/clarion-weekend-31-july-2026/

I don't know whether this is a coincidence but I have noticed more class 196 trains at Oxford in recent weeks.

[grahame]

Real time trains showing a fabulous - half hourly - service on a sample date - 17th December.   All class 5 trains which as I recall means they're not available to the public.

[anthony215]

According to the latest Oxford Clarion we may have a solution to the problem of 'guards' on trains:
"Chiltern is now advertising for Customer Service Inspectors to work from its Bletchley depot, the base for East West Rail services. The inspectors will perform guard-like duties such as “provide a high level of customer care on trains”, “take part in revenue protection activities on trains”, “perform on-train announcing”, and “take action to rectify or report faults”.

The train doors will still be operated by drivers, not guards, so services could run without a second staff member in exceptional circumstances – as is common south of London. An internal Government document says that issues at Winslow station will not obstruct entry to service, and that the trains have been upgraded to support ‘Superpower mode’, which improves acceleration, to meet the tight timetable. With Chiltern due to be nationalised on 20 September, a December start date for the Oxford–Milton Keynes service is now widely expected."

https://oxfordclarion.uk/clarion-weekend-31-july-2026/

I don't know whether this is a coincidence but I have noticed more class 196 trains at Oxford in recent weeks.

Oh if those 196s  are anything like our class 197s sports mode is good but they drink diesel and ad blue

[ChrisB]

I'm informed that these additional staff are NOT safety-critical (I thought they were?) and Bletchley-MKC^▸ (Milton Keynes Central) is not DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) compliant, which I did know.

[Electric train]

I'm informed that these additional staff are NOT safety-critical (I thought they were?) and Bletchley-MKC^▸ (Milton Keynes Central) is not DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) compliant, which I did know.

Bletchley (EWR^▸ (East West Railway (Oxford to Bedford), or possibly East Worthing station, depending on context) platform) would be DOO, I would be surprised if it is not.

MKC there are platform dispatch staff already so I suspect there is no need for DOO as the platform staff will give the "CD^▸ (Capital Delivery)" and depart indications to the Driver

[grahame]

Still awaiting the return of passenger carrying services between Oxford amd Bletchley ... here's a look to how it basin was in 1965




Edit to correct typo, for clarity. CfN^▸ (Chris from Nailsea, an administrator on this forum).