Critics accuse RMT of dragging Scotland into an English conductors' dispute with 'red herring' safety warnings

While RMT has accused the rail operator of "dirty tricks" and characterised its fight as a battle for safety, ScotRail's managing director Phil Verster says the union is "mischief making" and standing in the way of a modernisation process designed to improve punctuality and reliability.

He also believes Scots have been needlessly "dragged into a national campaign" over what is known as driver-only, or driver-controlled, operations (DOO/DCO).

Confusingly, "driver-only" does not mean the driver is the only crew member on board.

It actually means there is no second "safety critical" staff member - that is, a conductor. Consequently, the train doors are opened and closed by the driver who checks that the platform is clear via CCTV from the driver's cab, while a ticket examiner handles passengers.

This is already the scenario on more than half of ScotRail services, especially in the heavily electrified Strathclyde region, compared to 30 per cent in England.

RMT, and drivers' union Aslef, insist it piles excess stress on drivers and increases the danger of passengers becoming trapped in doors or falling off platforms.

Train operators counter that there is no evidence of an increased accident rate and that the method shaves valuable seconds off station stop times, boosting punctuality.

The current ScotRail dispute was triggered when RMT sought guarantees that ScotRail operator, Abellio, would not extend DOO during its franchise term, as England's Govia Thameslink was doing.

ScotRail refused, but stressed that it had not tabled any proposals to do so either.

"We have been pulled into a dispute without even having had the opportunity to put a proposal forward on how we are going to operate these new trains," said Mr Verster.

However, with ScotRail set to take delivery of 70 brand new Hitachi trains from 2017 - specifically designed for DOO operation - the conductors' role inevitably faces a shift away from the traditional operational and safety functions to more customer-led duties.

Though management are adamant that none of the 700 conductors will lose their job, pay or terms and conditions, RMT have seized on an internal ScotRail memo - accidentally leaked on Monday - which talked of plans to extend DOO on various routes including Edinburgh-Glasgow and Carstairs and stated that "around 100 fewer trains will be cancelled each year" if ticket examiners replaced conductors since they could be deployed to wider range of services.

Mick Hogg, Scottish organiser for RMT, said: "We've now got that in black and white. It's in the public domain, so we know what their proposals are all about. It is all about union-busting and getting rid of a 100 guard jobs and replacing the guards with ticket examiners with no safety responsibility.

"The public understand how important it is to retain that second safety-critical role to ensure that passengers are evacuated from the train safely in an emergency, like a derailment or collision."

ScotRail said the document had "no official standing whatsoever" and that the ideas outlined "were subsequently withdrawn".

The bigger question for the public is whether driver-only operations actually are more dangerous.

RMT note that of the 10 serious incidents investigated by the UK's Rail Accident Investigation Board since January 2011 where passengers were killed or injured after being trapped in doors, dragged by moving trains or falling from platforms, 80 per cent involved DOO services.

Although this is true, critics say it is misleading since the DOO services are concentrated in commuter and intercity routes where there are simply more stops and more people.

"The opportunities for [accidents] at the platform is disproportionately higher than on a longer distance, conductor-operated service with fewer stops," said Mr Verster, adding that bad incidents were "very often related to alcohol abuse".

He cited one example where a drunk commuter had kicked a train as it pulled away and fallen off the platform.

David Prescott, a rail consultant based in Scotland, said RMT's safety claims were "a complete red herring" since the practice has been widespread in Scotland for 30 years, approved by the Office of Road and Rail, and several lines - including Paisley Canal, Whifflet and Cumbernauld - had replaced conductors with ticket examiners in recent years following electrification without sparking any industrial action.

Mr Prescott said it was really "an English dispute", rooted in the Govia Thameslink conflict, and fears that the union's power to disrupt will be weakened.

"You can run a train without a ticket examiner, but not a conductor - if it's supposed to have one," he said.

Paul Tetlaw, of sustainable transport campaigners Transform Scotland, said passengers needed modern, faster and more reliable services to persuade them to move from road to rail - adding that safety fears had to be put in context.

He said: "You are 30 times more likely to be killed travelling by road than by train, and you're hundreds of times more likely to be seriously injured travelling by road than by train. So if we really want to be focused on safety in our everyday travel, we should be looking at the road system.

"At a time of great growth and investment in the railway, it's sad to see rail workers inconveniencing passengers in the way that they are at the moment."

Roger Ford, industry editor for Modern Railways, said staff trained for emergencies were vital "when something big goes wrong", but added that he saw no reason why ticket examiners could not be safety trained with conductors also becoming more passenger focused.

He said: "One of the complaints has always been that the conductors sit in the back cab - they don't get out and deal with the passengers. It's a very touchy subject, but it's nothing new."